Spam:****, RE: Demon license?

[Bart Silverstrim]

On Jul 20, 2005, at 11:39 AM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:

>
> On Jul 20, 2005, at 7:05 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
>
>>
>> As I understand it Apple is using some of the code from FreeBSD, but 
>> FreeBSD isn't necessarily *getting* anything as an obligation from 
>> them.
>>
>> Ideally, if businesses give to them, that's a bonus.  Businesses have 
>> always been able to take from FreeBSD as per it's license without 
>> giving anything.  But when you start doing tit-for-tat 
>> scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours relationships with businesses, 
>> there's going to be problems.
>>
>
> Just as an aside:  Apple does push code back as far as I know.  There 
> was talk last year for example about MSDOS FS support being put back 
> in from Apple Darwin.

Yes, I believe they do.  What I'm saying (and what I think a great 
number of people don't think about) is that they're doing this but 
aren't *obligated* to do so.  For FreeBSD, as I understand it, you can 
take FreeBSD, slap new images to it and alter some of the code and sell 
it as your own (except for copyright notices? That may have changed).  
There you go...you have a new product, the *BSD people don't care.  You 
don't have to do anything for the FreeBSD team in return.  If you do, 
they'd probably appreciate it.  If you don't, well, life goes on.

I'm against the slide into an obligatory relationship...FreeBSD starts 
marketing and courting a couple corporate "friends" and then there may 
be some obligation back and forth...forcing certain device support, or 
maybe some "encouragement" to ignore other vendors, introduce more 
politics.  As the whole logoscot affair shows I think there's enough 
politics in the group and userbase as it stands. :-)