On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 01:22:28AM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
You could equally say that
"OpenBSD != University of California, Berkeley"
was wrong since OpenBSD uses the licence of the UCB. [1]
Or that
"OpenBSD != NetBSD"
was wrong since OpenBSD is just a spinoff of NetBSD, and for everyday
people all the *BSD operating systems are anyway the same.
Or that
"OpenBSD != Linux kernel"
was wrong since although they are not equal, they are related since they
are both open source operating systems.
Or even that
"OpenBSD != FSF"
was wrong.
In case you wonder about the latter, check at [2] whose project's
project leaders won the FSF's Award for the Advancement of Free Software
and whose project's project leader did not.
The FSF and the Linux kernel community have some relationship, but they
are quite distinct communities with different views on some things.
As an example, Linus Torvalds made clear some years ago that the kernel
is GPLv2 only and will stay GPLv2 forever. This makes it impossible to
move the kernel to the FSF's new GPLv3. If you have such differences in
mind it sounds ridiculous when people don't differentiate between the
FSF and the Linux kernel community.
cu
Adrian
[1] I don't know the background of the 2-clause BSD licence, but at
least for the 3-clause and 4-clause BSD licences this was true
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Award_for_the_Advancement_of_Free_Software
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
