On 9/1/07, Steven wrote:
Someone other than the authors _cannot_ change the license. Neither of
these licenses grants anyone rights to change or remove licenses of
the distributed code. In fact, they explicitly state that the license
(and copyright) must stay intact. (New material can have a new license
clause appended to it, but that is completely different than what
you're talking about.)
This whole escapade would be a lot simpler if people would stop
relying on guesswork and assumptions for matters they do not
understand. For most matters like these in the real world, the
preferred behavior is to clam up until you study and understand it,
and then engage in commentary.
Read Theo's earlier email on the matter. He explains it quite well.
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118861134304239&w=2
DS
| Peter Zijlstra | [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8 |
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 005/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingDrivers |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 03/37] dccp: List management for new feature negotiation |
| Frans Pop | svc: failed to register lockdv1 RPC service (errno 97). |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
