This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 04:46:24PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 11 13:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> >>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
>> >>their own terms?
>> >
>> >That's it, more or less.
>> I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
>> was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
>> gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
>> newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
>> Cygwin can't do the same.
>BTAT in 2011.  IANAL, but the reason is the buyout clause which,
>apparently, requires a certain amount of red tape while, incidentally,
>funds a non-trivial amount of the time I can spend on Cygwin.
>I'm just curious why you never asked the question while you were still
>working at Red Hat.  Anyway, I asked again.  Times change so procedures
>might change as well.

"I was told not to worry about it"

[rest of long rant snipped]


Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]