Recommendation for a CL data structures library
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: [2nd CfP] 7th European Lisp Workshop at ECOOP'10, June 21/22
Next: §§§ 2010 Cheap wholesale ED Hardy Suit, Baby Suit, Lacoste Suit ect at www.rijing-trade.com <Paypal Payment>
From: Raffael Cavallaro on 23 Mar 2010 09:33 On 2010-03-23 09:11:03 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: > It is not correct to say that Mac OS X "is" BSD Unix for normal > definitions of "is". Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." Mac OS X *is* a UNIX by the only legal definition of UNIX and for normal definitions of "is." The license under which Apple releases its open source doesn't change Mac OS X's BSD heritage, and it doesn't invalidate Mac OS X's UNIX certification. warmest regards, Ralph -- Raffael Cavallaro
From: Hyman Rosen on 23 Mar 2010 09:41 On 3/23/2010 9:33 AM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > The license under which Apple releases its open source doesn't change > Mac OS X's BSD heritage, and it doesn't invalidate Mac OS X's UNIX > certification. However, the license under which Apple releases its OS components does affect how those components may be used by others. BSD-licensed code does not require publication of changes, for example, while the Apple license does. Since much of the discussion in this newsgroup focuses on license features and requirements, saying that Mac OS X "is" BSD needlessly confuses that issue.
From: Pillsy on 23 Mar 2010 09:48 On Mar 23, 9:11 am, Hyman Rosen <hyro...(a)mail.com> wrote: > On 3/22/2010 8:01 PM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > > 2. Mac OS X is BSD Unix. It has existed for half the time that linux > > has, and has more than 5 times the web client share of linux, so yes, > > BSD is on its way to eclipsing linux as a client OS. > It is not correct to say that Mac OS X "is" BSD Unix for normal > definitions of "is". > Look at <http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-105/>. > The mix of licenses is broad, but many of Apple's own OS components > are licensed under the APPLE PUBLIC SOURCE LICENSE, found at > <http://www.opensource.apple.com/license/apsl/>. If Raffael had said that OS X is a "BSD-licensed Unix", your argument would be on point (and Raffael's would be very, very silly). However, he said nothing of the sort. Whether it's a BSD Unix or not has nothing to do with its licensing, and never has. The BSD Unix codebase was intentionally licensed in such a way as to allow people to make and sell partially or wholly closed-source, commercial derivatives. Over the years, a lot of vendors have taken advantage of this opportunity, including Sun, NeXT, Apple and, IIRC, Digital. Cheers, Pillsy
From: Pillsy on 23 Mar 2010 10:00 On Mar 21, 10:14 pm, p...(a)informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote: > Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...(a)pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com> > writes: [...] > > Which is why many developers choose to avoid this possibility and use > > LGPL/LLGPL/BSD/MIT/Apache licensed libraries instead. And now we've > > come full circle. > Sure. > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? He shouldn't, and AFAICT isn't trying to. Upthread, you said that you allow people to use your libraries at the price of abiding by the GPL. Pointing out that the price you charge is too high for a given market is not remotely the same thing as forcing you to choose a different price. Indeed, people attempt to negotiate, better prices with vendors all the time. Of course, vendors refuse to lower their prices in response to such requests with a good deal of frequency as well. When the consideration being exchanged is just a pile of currency, this is all regarded as so mundane that people hardly notice it. The only thing that's different here is that the negotiation is over source code instead of money. Cheers, Pillsy
From: David Kastrup on 23 Mar 2010 10:00
Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavallaro(a)pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com> writes: > On 2010-03-23 09:11:03 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: > >> It is not correct to say that Mac OS X "is" BSD Unix for normal >> definitions of "is". > > Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." Not really. Darwin may be, but all the graphical folderol running on it is rather descended (or written new) from older MacOS code not based on BSD. -- David Kastrup |