On Feb 01, 11 16:34:03 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stephan Kleine <bitdealer@gmail.com> wrote:
simply dual licensing his software and instead prefers to troll the web over this issue.
A dual CDDL / GPL license would indeed be extremly helpful also from my point of view.
Sorry, but you seem to be insufficiently informed about the legal background. There is a single person who claims that there is a "legal problem" with the original software, but that person did never send any legal proof for his claim.
We would not need to discuss this age old issue, if we had a dual license in place to just confirm that there is no problem. Currently, we are unsure, if you want your CDDL-licensed work to be linkable with GPL-licensed work. If you want to give this discussion a happy-ending you can say "let's go dual". This may seem redundant to you, but not to everybody else.
Conclusion: you ask for a fix to a non-existent problem. The uncertainty is the well-existing problem. It needs fixing, please help us with that one.
Trusting in "hints" to external review authorities may or may not be sufficient for everybody. I cannot say, we have not tried. A courtesy from the copyright-owner would be a much stronger token.
What we however need, is some sort of defense against attacks against OpenSource projects that are only based on libel and slander.....
This one is unclear to me. I fail to see how a license could protect against being badmouthed. thanks, JW- -- o \ Juergen Weigert paint it green! __/ _=======.=======_ <V> | jw@suse.de back to ascii! __/ _---|____________\/ \ | 0911 74053-508 __/ (____/ /\ (/) | _____________________________/ _/ \_ vim:set sw=2 wm=8 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) SuSE. Supporting Linux since 1992. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org