Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 22nd Jun 2008 22:49 UTC, submitted by Jan Schaumann
NetBSD Alistair Crooks, president of the NetBSD Foundation, announced recently that it "has changed its recommended license to be a 2 clause BSD license". This makes NetBSD more easily available to a number of organisations and individuals who may have been put off by the advertising or endorsement clauses.
Thread beginning with comment 319539
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: yeah
by kwag on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 08:21 UTC in reply to "RE: yeah"
Member since:

"That said, look up recent benchmarks, and you will see that most BSDs are doing fine, even on multi-core hardware. Sure, there are some weak spots, but they are all decent and solid UNIX systems."

And I'd like to add that most of the Internet runs on BSD code, and not Linux.
Example: Cisco routers, Junos?, TCP stacks, etc. are all BSD based.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: yeah
by Nossie on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 09:15 in reply to "RE[2]: yeah"
Nossie Member since:

"I'd like to add that most of the *closed source* Internet runs on BSD code, and not Linux"

There ;) fixed that for you.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: yeah
by cjg_ on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 10:11 in reply to "RE[3]: yeah"
cjg_ Member since:

So? Juniper contributed back a MIPS port of FreeBSD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: yeah
by danieldk on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 10:19 in reply to "RE[3]: yeah"
danieldk Member since:

"I'd like to add that most of the *closed source* Internet runs on BSD code, and not Linux"

So? The BSD license allows for this use, and most developers don't mind, otherwise they wouldn't have used the BSD license. While I emphasize with (copyleft) free software, I also think free choice of developers is important (they wrote the code), and some developers chose to use a license that allows vendors to use their code in a proprietary manner.

And in the end, I think this is good. Remember that in the 80ies and early 90ies free software wasn't accepted as much in the industry. If BSD originally used a copyleft license, vendors probably wouldn't have used the BSD TCP/IP stack en-masse. The result could have been miserable: a dozen of semi-compatible proprietary stacks.

Sometimes non-copyleft code is necessary to make standard implementations.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[4]: yeah
by Soulbender on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 10:20 in reply to "RE[3]: yeah"
Soulbender Member since:

Who cares if it is closed or open as long as it does what it should?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: yeah
by helf on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 12:37 in reply to "RE[3]: yeah"
helf Member since:

You know what I find funny? most people, seemingly, that bitch about software licenses and the like, don't actually *code* themselves.

Reply Parent Score: 5