John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I believe he was worried about bundling issues. I guess AIX still bundles
> > MH with its OS, and they wouldn't be able to upgrade to bundling nmh unless
> > they followed the GNU rules and included the source code and such (which I
> > don't believe they do for any other pieces of their OS). IBM may not be at
> > all interested in upgrading to nmh _regardless_ of its license, though --
> > who knows...
>
> the copyright holder retains the right to release hist code under any
> combinations of conditions that seem convenient: to you, GPL. To IBM a
> commercial licence for which they pay heaps to hide the source code;-)
>
> It becomes a little messy when there are patches from third parties
> included unless those third parties relinquish their rights to the owner
> of the original work.
>
> I'm feeling a bit primed up on this, having been in discussions recently
> on two other lists. The arguments seem sensible to me, though I'm not a
> lawyer.
Great, so based on your "priming", what would you suggest for nmh?
> The second discussion was wrt cups (www.cups.org) where the site
> explicitly states that you can have it under PL or a commercial licence.
> Someone on the list saw this as a diminution of his rights.
>
>
> Remember, too, that IBM is releasing its own open-source code these days;
> there's jikes (high-speed java compiler), jfs (journalling filesystem),
> currently implemented on AIX and OS/2 is being released under GPL for
> Linux. It's more likely a bureaucracy and/or procedures issue (how do we
> support this but not that?) than policy these days.
>
> --
> Cheers
> John Summerfield
> http://os2.ami.com.au/os2/ for OS/2 support.
> Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Harkless | To prevent SPAM contamination, please
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | do not post this private email address
SpeedGate Communications, Inc. | to the USENET or WWW. Thank you.
