Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 26th Mar 2011 02:00 UTC
Mac OS X When you run smbd -V on your Snow Leopard installation, you'll see it's running SAMBA version 3.0.28a-apple. While I'm not sure how much difference the "-apple" makes, version 3.0.28a is old. Very old. In other words, it's riddled with bugs. Apple hasn't updated SAMBA in 3 years, and for Lion, they're dumping it altogether for something homegrown. The reason? SAMBA is now GPLv3.
Thread beginning with comment 467959
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Brynet
by Nth_Man on Sat 26th Mar 2011 10:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Brynet"
Nth_Man
Member since:
2010-05-16

riddled with lawyerisms

A license is a legal contract, if you are going to do one, you have to do it with all the necessary details and forms. If not, a lawyer can come and bite you in the details.

For more intuitive explanations, you can write FAQs, quick guides, etc, like in
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html

I think RMS is a closet lawyer.

You can see FSF's board of directors
http://www.fsf.org/about/board
the directors of the Software Freedom Law Center
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/about/team/
and mainly its boss: Eben Moglen, professor of law and legal history at Columbia University.

The FSF released the GPLv3, approved by the Software Freedom Law Center.

I hope you remember this next time you call someone "closet lawyer".

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[4]: Comment by Brynet
by Soulbender on Sun 27th Mar 2011 04:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Brynet"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Nonsense.

if you are going to do one, you have to do it with all the necessary details and forms.


Only if you want to impose additional restrictions and clauses, such as what the GPL does.

The FSF released the GPLv3, approved by the Software Freedom Law Center.


Wow. Impressive! or not. They approved their own license, pretty much.

I hope you remember this next time you call someone "closet lawyer"


Yeah, I'll remember not to poke fun at RMS again. Honestly. It seems it's a sensitive topic.

Edited 2011-03-27 04:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Brynet
by Nth_Man on Mon 28th Mar 2011 00:01 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Brynet"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

> > Contracts. if you are going to do one, you have to
> > do it with all the necessary details and forms.

> Only if you want to impose additional restrictions
> and clauses [...].

Let me repeat that if you are going to do contracts, do them well, with all the necessary details and forms, with the supervision of a lawyer every time there is a substantially different contract than can have big effects. If you don't do it, sooner or later you'll learn it the hard way.

> Wow. Impressive! or not. They approved their own
> license, pretty much.

You talked like if it was only a "closet lawyer" who made GPLv3, I showed you it was not this way. I gave you data. You can say "Wow" the times you want.

Reply Parent Score: 3