Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 23:46:41 -0500 From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: imp@freebsd.org, phk@freebsd.org, Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD BSD License 3 -> 2 Clause History Message-ID: <CAD2Ti2-=cUmABeDMFpuSvHp_h0PUXZTF6J-2TdiKi%2BnsRfskUA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <54a1ec2a.853c460a.1d8a.2b34SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> References: <54a1ec2a.853c460a.1d8a.2b34SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org> wrote: > Reason you can't find any history about it in FreeBSD is > because the 2 term initiative did not occur at FreeBSD. > > Nor does the 2-term licence have anything to do with FreeBSD, > as a careful review of their tree will show. It is a complete > muddle. > ... > FreeBSD simply started picking up pieces of it because of code which > arrived from other places, and perhaps after that it became more of a > trend. The change in question, from 3 to 2 clause, is here in Dec 1999: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/COPYRIGHT?r1=50978&r2=124033 Next step is to ask imp/phk, and search the FreeBSD lists around that time for context as to why. > The 2-term conversion already started in NetBSD land, I do not recall > which developer it was that started not asserting it on his own. But > it became even more of a pressure during the licence audit in OpenBSD. > Eventually durig that audit it became easier to convince a few > stragglers to consider use of the well understood original ISC > (without the "and/or" balony), and then that became the major trend > here in OpenBSD. By suggesting that, it stops confusing chatter, and > all projects can incorporate our code for any purpose. That's the > goal. Yes, OpenBSD is more rigorous regarding conformance of, and conforming, their tree to a single, license. And that is of value. > Please do not confuse the change from 4-term to 3-term It is presumed everyone is aware of the UCB/Hoskins advertising clause formal removal of Jul 1999. http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:BSD_4Clause 4-clause / original http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:BSD_3Clause 3-clause / modified / revised / new > 3-term to 2-term As is the subject herein. http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:FreeBSD 2-clause / freebsd / simplified > the 2-term to ISC. http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:ISC isc This is really more of a comparative regarding the 'and/or' bit. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html http://opensource.org/licenses/ http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/dragonfly.git/blob/HEAD:/COPYRIGHT http://netbsd.org/about/redistribution.html http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html openbsd > Very easy for people to muddle up history. Having this thread out there 15ys later as a refresh would be good then. (The original thread of the same subject was posted a couple weeks ago to freebsd-questions.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAD2Ti2-=cUmABeDMFpuSvHp_h0PUXZTF6J-2TdiKi%2BnsRfskUA>