On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> David Maxwell <david@vex.net> wrote:
> 
> > Also - from the first entry in the FAQ: 
> >
> > "We wanted a copyleft license that..."
> >
> > That section 3.1 is definitly viral. That's incompatible with NetBSD's
> > Goals.
> >
> 
> The CDDL is not vial, the GPL is.
> 
> The difference is that the GPL "infects" code that it is linked to
> with the GPL. This is not true for the CDDL.

You cut out section 3.1, so I'll repeat it.

"Any Covered Software that You distribute or otherwise make available in
Executable form must also be made available in Source Code form and that
Source Code form must be distributed only under the terms of this
License."

Yes, I used the term viral loosely, but whether GPL'd or CDDL'd,
shipping a non-BSD licensed tar would mean that NetBSD wasn't completely
BSD licensed any more. (the base system and kernel)

Since we want people to be free to use NetBSD for whatever they want,
imposing a license that they must share the source of any changes they
make would be self-defeating.

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net --> From a real request to a
helpdesk "Can you please open the following ports in the firewall: 1024-90000"
						- Anonymous to protect the guilty