At 09:38 4/11/00 +0530, you wrote:
>Hi
>
>Shucks you'd think these license nuts had nothing else to do. Isn't there
>some benchmarking work or something like that must be on the to-do list for
>you guys and pending. :-|
Well considering that it only requires one amendment to LGPL (or GPL for
that matter) to make what jBoss is doing legal I think it is irrational not
to do it. All you have to do is add a line like "Java Standard extentions
are exempt from terms in this license" and possibly "Free software as
defined by GNU/Debian is exempt from terms of this license" if you want to
include Tomcat in distribution. Yet everyone seems so dead against that and
prefers to violate the (L)GPL. Now they are changing the license again to
solve a problem that doesn't exist - tell me that is classified as a good
move. I think not.
Cheers,
Pete
*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power." |
| -Abraham Lincoln |
*------------------------------------------------------*
