[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: reiserfs-utils_3.5.19-1_i386.changes REJECTED (fwd)

Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 05:16:11PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > And I would still recommend a less ambiguous phrasing.
> I agree. I hope there is a chance to get it changed.

Hans seems to be willing to accept a better wording. So if someone
can come up with a better wording speak up now.

From the reiserfs mailinglist:

Hans Reiser wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > If this is the case may I suggest changing the text a bit then? If you
> > release it under the GPL and add a statement like the one below things
> > will be a lot more obvious.
> >
> >     If you want to use reiserfs but can't due to its GPL license
> >     please contact Hans Reiser to discuss pricing for differently
> >     licensed source.
> Your phrasing does reflect the intent, except that some of my phrasing
> makes unambiguous that which the GPL makes very ambiguous and lawsuit
> inviting.
> That is, the whole proprietary kernel module issue, and what is a
> derived work.  What is a derived work is very difficult to define
> independently of the software, which I think is why the GPL does not
> attempt to do so.  I think it isappropriate for an author of GPL
> software to define what is considered a derivedwork in a manner that
> other persons can reasonably rely on when making decisionsas to how to
> properly and legally integrate it with non-GPL software.  In the Linux
> context I have to use Linus's interpretation in order to be a good
> team member, elsewhere I can use Stallman's more constraining
> interpretation.
> I am quite happy if folks suggest better phrasing than what I use.


 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| wichert@liacs.nl                    http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |

Attachment: pgpyjd_ilXESm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: