From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 28 21:06:53 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7F416A4CE for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:06:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from web13403.mail.yahoo.com (web13403.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A94F43FA3 for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:06:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from giffunip@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20031029050650.22164.qmail@web13403.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.91.194.144] by web13403.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:06:50 PST Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:06:50 -0800 (PST) From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Fwd: Open Watcom license issues X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 05:06:53 -0000 Hi; This was posted today (on a slightly different form) on the Openwatcom newsgroups. I thought some people might like to know. Also... NO, they are not considering the BSDL and please keep me off any licensing bikeshed that might start here :). __________________ Hi All, I have good news on the Open Watcom license issues. We had a conference call with Sybase this afternoon to discuss the license issues, and Sybase is considering taking the suggestion of Bart Oldeman and incorporating the changes that Apple made in their APL 2.0 license for the Open Watcom Public License 2.0. We are also looking specifically at this issues of runtime library redistribution, and more importantly proprietry programs linked against the runtime library. If necessary Sybase will consider allowing the runtime library binaries, and binary code linked with the runtime library, to be licensed under a different license. The license would be more like the runtime library license you find with any regular commercial compiler such as Visual C++ or Borland C++. To that end however we are also considering whether a few modifications to the Open Watcom license 2.0 would alleviate the need for for a separate runtime library license. If there are specific areas of the the proposed 2.0 license you feel conflict with the needs of commercial developers, please let me know so we can discuss this with Sybase. More importantly if you have suggestions for how to make the license better, let me know also. For reference, here is a PDF copy of the proposed Sybase V2.0 license, along with a redline marked version so you can see the changes from the V1.0 license: http://www.openwatcom.org/ftp/license-2.pdf http://www.openwatcom.org/ftp/license-2-redline.pdf -- Thanks! -- Kendall Bennett Chief Executive Officer SciTech Software, Inc. Phone: (530) 894 8400 http://www.scitechsoft.com ~ SciTech SNAP - The future of device driver technology! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/