OSNews

How is that "Capitalism"?

Freeloading off the backs of others is just as much in the hearts of socialists as it is of the capitalists.

You won't be heard here dude. Just not enough culture out there. Give up.

Nobody made the OpenSSH developers give their product away for free. It was a choice they made. If they wanted money from it, they should be selling binaries or selling source licenses.

Stop begging.

No one's begging. Did you read the interview?

Theo is complaining that Sun is using the BSD licence as it was intended. If he wanted Sun to play nice, he should have used the LGPL or something similar... whining that corporations are acting in their own best interest is not really that productive.

"Theo is complaining that Sun is using the BSD licence as it was intended."

This has nothing to do with the license. Stop trolling for flamewars.

Indeed.

Nobody pays if they don't have to. In a corporate environment, it's hard to justify spending on products with a price tag, encrypted license keys et al. Now try to justify spending when you don't have to !

Theo should tap in the sponsoring budget of tech companies, not their 'good tech citizenship' budget.

"I also do not understand that others post claiming similar views are quickly accused of trolling by the BSD zealots... Sure there are GNU zealots, but if they prove their views with logic and empiric demostrations, why they should not do it?"

Because it is trolling. The license, be it BSD or (L)GPL, has nothing to do with financing. They only deal with the freedom of the source and has no provisioning WHATSOEVER for licensing fees. I'm sure a lot of people find discussing the pros and cons of the different licenses fascinating but it still has nothing to do with the money side of things. Using the GPL, for example, does not stop people from using your code and not giving back money or otherwise help your project financially

Edited 2006-03-29 08:35

!!!!

" The license, be it BSD or (L)GPL, has nothing to do with financing. They only deal with the freedom of the source and has no provisioning WHATSOEVER for licensing fees. I'm sure a lot of people find discussing the pros and cons of the different licenses fascinating but it still has nothing to do with the money side of things. Using the GPL, for example, does not stop people from using your code and not giving back money or otherwise help your project financially "

--

Absolutly right .. I could not agreee with you more!

Just tell me why did you answer my post with the above metioned text if I have never said the contrary in any of my posts... ???

I still thing that many people shoukd finish reading the whole post before answering in a hectic way!

!!!

"Has anyone heard about the Lemmings in Scandinavia, throwing themselves to the death from the cliffs... That is what happens when your model is not substainable!"

Lemmings dont actually do this. It's just another popular but untrue myth. Maybe you should read up on the animal kingdom.

<offtopic>
Lemmings dont actually do this. It's just another popular but untrue myth. Maybe you should read up on the animal kingdom.

The way I understand it, is that in case of overpopulation (every 4 years or so), they mass migrate elsewhere, but always to lower regions for some reason. And if they are in sufficient numbers, they will occasionally blunder off of cliffs en masse.

!!!

"Lemmings dont actually do this. It's just another popular but untrue myth. Maybe you should read up on the animal kingdom"

I am quite interested in ethology.
Ok, maybe your right.. can you enlight us briefly about what Lemmings do, please?

!!!

It has EVERYTHING to do with license. With BSD license, which was their OWN choice, nobody owes them monetary copensation for their efforts, and yet Theo whines that the project doesn't get anything in return. Sure, some might donate them money out of pure generosity, and that will be a Good Thing(TM) - but REQUIRING generosity is stupid and childish.

Here's the relevant long quote for those who haven't bothered to RTFA:

-----------------------------------------------
If I add up everything we have ever gotten in exchange for our efforts with OpenSSH, it might amount to $1,000. This all came from individuals. For our work on OpenSSH, companies using OpenSSH have never given us a cent. What about companies that incorporate OpenSSH directly into their products, saving themselves millions of dollars? Companies such as Cisco, Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Siemens, a raft of medium-sized firewall companies -- we have not received a cent. Or from Linux vendors? Not a cent.

Of course we did not set out to create OpenSSH for the money -- we purposely made it completely free so that the "telnet infrastructure" of the 1980s would die. But it sure is sad that none of these companies return even a fraction of value in kind.

If you want to judge any entity particularly harshly, judge Sun. Yearly they hold interoperability events, for NFS and other protocols, and they include SSH implementation tests as well. Twice we asked them to cover the travel and accommodation costs for a developer to come to their event, and they refused. Considering that their SunSSH is directly based on our code, that is just flat out insulting. Shame on you Sun, shame, shame, shame.

I will say it here -- if an OpenSSH hole is found that applies to SunSSH, Sun will not be informed. Or maybe that has happened already.
-----------------------------------------------

Sun does NOT owe them anything.

Sure, they didn't break the law. They don't owe them anything. But they are still jerks, Sun relies on some guys work and they could at least return a favor.

http://www.onthenet.com.au/~q/nvnet/
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nve

I haven't seen anything being back-ported lately to other BSDs but I admit I'm not familiar with NetBSD and Dragon Fly, maybe they did something.

Regards, Daniel

nve is a binary blob driver, it uses Linux's binary blob, nfe doesn't have a blob, OpenBSD developers did the hard thing and reverse engineered.

I agree

Moulinneuf, the resident OSNews GNU/Linux Prior, has spoken.

Tom K , I know I showed you that you where duped by an individual who does not represent what he claim to be and what you admire in him. If he did not care about it then why is he attacking it and why is he not dual licensing is software in order to finance them into existance?

BTW , thanks for the religious lessons I had no idea what a prior was , I aint one and GNU/Linux is not a religion , its a choice made by people who where wronged before by the proprietary software and BSD's. Its also a working solution.

You were "wronged" by the BSDs? I laugh heartily at you.

What, did the BSDs come into your room at night, and touch you in bad places? Which one of them was the worst? One would assume that Beastie is the most devilish, but then again the pufferfish could perform mightily-unfriendly gestures as well. God forbid me even thinking about what's possible with the flag and its pole.

Canada or Quebec?

Both Quebec is a province of CANADA

Unfortunately the GPL *still* doesnt have any clauses about licensing fees. How hard is this to understand?
Both these licenses (and most OSS licenses) ONLY deals with the source code, not with any monetary matters.

Edited 2006-03-29 08:38

"This is no different than say building a 'Linux From Scratch system,' making no changes to the source and selling the resulting binary system (with source provided), keeping all the money you make from it, giving nothing back to the people who wrote the software."

Due to the thread breakage, I'm not sure if you imply that this is a bad thing. To me, it's using the license exactly as it is intended, and therefore completely OK...

"Due to the thread breakage, I'm not sure if you imply that this is a bad thing. To me, it's using the license exactly as it is intended, and therefore completely OK..."

I was trying to say that it does not matter in this case which of the two licenses are employed, as such is irrelevant to the issue of the project needing more money. BSDL or GPL, the real problem is going to remain. GPLing OpenBSD isn't going to make Theo's electrical bills any smaller, nor will it make Sun or whoever else feel obligated to give OpenBSD more funds.

License here is irrelevant. Managing what money they do have, or finding out a way to bring in more is what's important.

/RE[2]:

I like OpenBSD, tho it is not my primary system. I am fairly neutral when it comes to TdR. I'd like very much for their work to continue.

It's been said that the OpenBSD Hackathons have been wildly productive affairs. Personally, I can't see why you can't just have all the devs using VOIP and supplying their own beer and avoiding the costs of travel altogether, but that's just me.

Google ads on the OpenBSD site, could be another minor option to help increase income. Retiring some of the more ancient and power hungry machines in his basement and move the continuing development of the more uncommon architectures on virtual harware and so on.

Sure, none of my suggestions are perfect, and some of them would have drawbacks, but for the time being it seems that they can't continue as they have and still be productive.

EDIT: can -> can't

Edited 2006-03-29 10:34

> Different licenses, same result.

You mean, the world only has gpl/bsd or mozilla licenses?

How about write something that fits your need?
Even the donation itself can probably hire some lawyer to get some draft up, especially if he likes working on open source for a cheaper fee.

"I'm sorry, but that is just plain childish and extremely unprofessional. It's like a kid refusing to do anything his mother tells him to because he doesn't get a cookie."

Really. Isn't it Sun's job to make sure their codebase is up to date, not OpenSSH's?
Why should the OpenSSH's guys go out of their way to help Sun, a gigantic company with wast resources, keeping their sh1t together? It's not like they're hiding anything, the code and release information is there for Sun to find all by themselves.

"If Theo wants people to take OpenBSD seriously, he should stop making pointless comments like this one."

The irony of you making this statement is so thick you could slice it with a butterknife.

"If you let personal grudges stand in the way of seeing the bigger picture (*cough*Amiga), then you have no place in the corporate world-- or in any world, for that matter."

OpenSSH/OpenBSD is not a corporate entity and does not exists to please corporations. It exists because
the developers are interest in working on it.

If Theo wants people to take OpenBSD seriously, he should stop making pointless comments like this one. If you really care about security and open source, you help anyone using your software (if that anyone has done nothing to break the licensing of course). If you let personal grudges stand in the way of seeing the bigger picture (*cough*Amiga), then you have no place in the corporate world-- or in any world, for that matter.

That's silly. Sun forked the code, and it's not OpenSSH at this point. He has no obligation to help them out or to notify them of any problems they may have caused with their changes. He already helped plenty by providing OpenSSH for free. It would be nice if they reciprocated and paid for some airfare and perhaps sent a few pieces of hardware his way. They choose not to, which seems pretty shitty and/or childish in it's own right.

Again, I ask that anyone that really has so much crap to sling about Theo should immediately cease using OpenSSH in protest.

Sadly I have to agree. I donated hardware and funds years ago, and when we were working out the shipping details, Theo was very unpleasant about it. Never even said a simple "thanks".

He's not getting anything from me again.

"Now quit spamming my mailing lists!"
Maybe you should ask "Lars" to do that. He's not an OpenBSD developer so what he is doing has nothing to do with the OpenBSD project.

He's not the only one, and that's not the only mailing list. Thanks.