Hmm.. *Just* one. And *possibly* one more. (..and maybe just another...)
Really? No more? You sure?
Make a couple of exceptions now, and you'll make a few more in the future.
Net result: twisted, unrecognizable, complicated versions of already
near-inscrutable legal formalisms. Open Source is sure going places.
Sure. I can just see it now.
JBossLicense extends MutantOSSLicense implements
PleaseAllAndEndUpPleasingNone. (silent all purists!)
Sigh. And I thought life was simple. :-(
Sandeep.
"The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree, is
by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals. We cause
accidents."
- Nathaniel Borenstein
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jBoss Developer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 10:17 AM
>To: jBoss Developer
>Subject: RE: [jBoss-Dev] READ PLEASE (AUTHORS)
>
>
>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 |
>*------------------------------------------------------*
>
>
>
