Subject: Re: softdep
To: Charles M. Hannum <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Michael Graff <email@example.com>
Date: 11/22/1999 20:36:18
firstname.lastname@example.org (Charles M. Hannum) writes:
> No, it's not that simple. It requires you to distribute the entire
> `derivative work' under terms with the same virus clause -- meaning
> that any derivative of that work is then `infected' by the GPL -- EVEN
> IF THE ORIGINAL GPLED CODE IS REMOVED.
> This is why it's known as the `General Public Virus', and why it's not
> welcome in NetBSD.
And this WHOLE issue with GPL'd soft update code would matter IFF the
code was under a GPL license. Which it is not.