[wplug] Is XFree86 4.4 worth it?

[Bill Moran]

Vanco, Don wrote:
> Look at me!  Reporting on OpenBSD!  
> 
> Not really.  Pretty harsh words below - but RH has made a statment that they
> too are "investigating" and will likely not support anything non-GPL.

This whole thing is pretty incredible.

Have any of you actually _read_ the new license?  I can't believe it's causing
a stir.  The license is basically a BSD license (which has been considered a
valid OSS license since the invention of the term) with the following specifics:
The clauses that require due credit be given insist that such credit be located
"in the same form and location as other such third-party acknowledgments."
This doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Personally, this won't change my use of X.

> ----- Forwarded message from Theo de Raadt <deraadt at cvs.openbsd.org> -----
> 
> From: Theo de Raadt <deraadt at cvs.openbsd.org>
> 
> Subject: XFree86 license
> 
> To: misc at openbsd.org
> 
> Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:27:47 -0700
> 
> Like other projects, we will not be incorporating new code from David Dawes
> into the XFree86 codebase used in OpenBSD. All such changes have to be
> skipped, rewritten, or you can contact the XFree86 group and place your own
> efforts to repair this damage.
> 
> I've tried to negotiate with David Dawes, and show him that his new license
> is not acceptable, and he has been hostile and it has gone nowhere. He keeps
> insisting that his license is a standard BSD licenses, yet, he won't use the
> same words that Berkeley used; if his words were intended to be compatible
> to the Berkeley spirit then he would be happy to use the same words; but he
> is not, and insists on different words which a lot of the community has
> trouble with.
> 
> It seems like every 8 years or so we have to go through some period where
> someone tries to take free software and makes it less free because they
> don't feel they are getting enough credit.
> 
> This is final; if that license stands, there will be forking.
> 
> And if you don't like that, don't bother telling me. Tell them.
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: wplug-admin at wplug.org on behalf of Jonathan S Billings 
> Sent: Mon 3/1/2004 10:25 AM 
> To: wplug at wplug.org 
> Cc: 
> Subject: Re: [wplug] Is XFree86 4.4 worth it?
> 
> 
> 
> I know I've heard that RMS has declared that the new XFree86 license is
> not GPL compatible, and that the debian folks are looking into it.  I
> haven't read it, since most license politics gives me a headache. 
> 
> I know that this release will be very useful to me, since I support a
> couple systems that have the Intel 845 chipset, which is kind of broken
> in 4.3.  Most of the changes I see (listed here:
> http://www.xfree86.org/4.4.0/RELNOTES2.html#2
> <http://www.xfree86.org/4.4.0/RELNOTES2.html#2> ) aren't features that the
> user might notice, if they were upgrading from an already-working X
> server.
> 
> jonathan
> 
> On Sun, 2004-02-29 at 22:30, chris at thistlethwaite.net wrote:
> 
>>Is anyone excited about the new release of XFree86??  I
>>was going to DL it today, but I wanted to see if anyone
>>else tried it out.  I'm just not sure if its worth a
>>couple hours on the phoneline.  Also, what's the deal
>>with the new licensing?  Everyone is freaking out about
>>it, I read through the changes and didn't see anything
>>that would make me not use it.  There are a handfull of
>>distros dropping 4.4 and just using 4.3.
>>Thanks,
>>Chris



-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com