From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 15 16:07:42 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444AC16A41C; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:07:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.NUXI.org (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB0CA43D68; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:07:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.NUXI.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.NUXI.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5FG7fv0055301; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:07:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.NUXI.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.NUXI.org (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id j5FG7fUJ055300; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:07:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:07:41 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Harti Brandt Message-ID: <20050615160741.GA55062@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Harti Brandt , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Emanuel Strobl , Lyndon Nerenberg References: <200504262010.49509@harrymail> <20050429200029.GC232@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <200506141824.17451@harrymail> <20050614185923.GA12375@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050615054209.L29741@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050615054209.L29741@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: Emanuel Strobl , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Lyndon Nerenberg Subject: Re: groff alternative? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:07:42 -0000 On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 05:47:26AM +0000, Harti Brandt wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, David O'Brien wrote: > > DO>On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 06:24:07PM +0200, Emanuel Strobl wrote: > DO>> today I read a news article (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/60600) > DO>> about OpenSolaris beeing released, but is there also the groff alternative > DO>> included? > DO>> I'd love to see a lean replacment for our current gnu version. > DO> > DO>Before everyone gets all happy thinking we can incorporate all kinds of > DO>bits from Open Solaris - one should read the license agrement first. > DO> > DO> COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE Version 1.0 > DO> .. > DO> 3.1. Availability of Source Code. > DO> Any Covered Software that You distribute or otherwise make available > DO> in Executable form must also be made available in Source Code form > DO> and that Source Code form must be distributed only under the terms of > DO> this License. > DO> > DO>this puts the CDDL1.0 in the same boat as GPL'ed code from a BSD stand > DO>point. > > I think that's not entirely correct. .. > In this case you don't need to distribute the pieces > that are covered by the other license. .. > You don't need to distribute the new file > with that function. Of course that new file will not be CDDL covered. I never said CDDL was viral. It is like the GPL (LGPL if you like) in that you must deliver the source with the binary. For key userland pieces or kernel subsystems this goes against our philosophy. For complete utilities, such as groff, CDDL is >< better than GPL as the end result is the 99.9% same. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)