site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com On 17 Feb 2006, at 21:36, Derick Centeno wrote: Jonas _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... 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. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com