If what has been reported here is true and Apple is changing or has
removed standard open source components to it's purposes (whatever
that
may be), which further limits other current and potentially workable
open source projects -- also reported, it might be time to consider
the
fact that Apple did enter into a open source agreement of a particular
unique nature which has aspects of the GPL standard but is not
completely standard open source.
Actually, Apple's open source license is based on the modified BSD
license and is pretty much standard in that respect (if they would
have used the "standard modified BSD license", as it is used by Open/
Net/FreeBSD, it wouldn't change anything to the current situation).
You are confusing open source software and free software (although
Apple's license is a free software license recognised by the GPL),
and in particular GPL-compatible and GPL-incompatible free software
licenses. Apple's free software license is by no means the only GPL-
incompatible free software license out there, nor is it particularly
insidious. You can find the whole list at http://www.fsf.org/
licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
Since they are the only copyright holders (I assume) on their APSL-
licensed stuff, even if they would have used the GPL for older
versions, they still could keep future versions completely closed. In
the end, this has nothing to do with GPL vs anything, and licenses
are just a red herring. It's simply about convincing Apple that
keeping this stuff open will help them more than it will harm them.
Jonas
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/email@hidden
