[ILUG] In other news

[Niall Walsh]

Rick Moen wrote:

>CDDL does strike me as being every bit as DFSG as its MPL predecessor.[1]
>  
>
At a cursory glance that is what I thought, but I wasn't sure how Debian 
stood on patent revocation clauses.

Checking the debian legal lists it seems it may be DFSG complient, 
depending on the implementation, but it may not be, decisions on 
packages when someone comes up with a package they want in.

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/12/msg00004.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00952.html

>>Of course whether it's worth it or not is another matter.  I 
>>guess both will be projects like rebuilding a Freely redistributable 
>>Suse/Novell Professional image, a test of just how many people care.
>>    
>>
>I think the latter would be a _great_ deal easier -- and more useful.
>  
>
So easy and useful that nobody has done it or mentioned it since the 
last time we mentioned it, but in the meantime the pope has died, a 
german pope has been elected, Apple has announced it's going to Intel 
Processors and Sarge has been released :-)   Something makes me think 
the people who use Novell/Suse just aren't the people to do the job (not 
meaning they can't but they don't) and so we'll probably see another 
pope at least before this happens!

Niall

>[1] Sun Microsystems solicited my feedback on the licence before its
>publc release.  Unfortunately, I did not have sufficient time in to help
>them during the very short comment period available -- but my impression
>of the licence is overwhelmingly favourable.
>  
>