>> That really smacks of proprietary software ("you can distribute this
>> code without jumping through lots of hoops if I say you can"), and
>> I'm rather disappointed that core was willing to accept code with
>> your new license on it.

>It looks to me like Chris and Core have been backed into a corner on
>this one.  I can't see how they could have done anything differently -
>the choice in behaviour was not left up to them.  It's a shame, but
>sometimes life is like that.

	Yes, it is a shame that Chris and Core feel that such a copyright
is necessary.  From their perspective, as you say, "the choice in behaviour
was not left up to them."

	However, I can't see how this copyright helps NetBSD.  This
copyright is very good for Chris's benefit, yes.  But does that personal
gain for Chris come at the Project's expense?

	Chris deserves a lot of credit.  Chris has done a lot of very good
work.  I hope that Chris continues to receive the credit that he deserves.

	But I also feel that this hurts the NetBSD project, because this
change represents a step in the wrong direction, and sets a precident in
the realm of Berkeley-copyright *BSD code that, if followed by others,
would be very sad for NetBSD indeed.

	I have not written as much code (or as important!), but of the 
code that I do write -- I have nothing against people using my code, and
I want it to be easy for them to use.  I don't want to make them 
"jump through hoops" to use it.

	And if I get a little credit along the way, hey, all the better.
But I can't ever forsee letting things get to the point where I want to
take legal action to get credit, especially when I know that the software
I'm contributing to is "free."

Cheers,
Phil
--
Phillip F Knaack