woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) writes:
> > If we do go with it, we should work rather hard to make sure that it
> > (and programs with licenses not unlike it, e.g. vixie cron, that are
> > nothing like the 'standard BSD license') is (are) segregated from the
> > code which has a 'standard-ish' license, just as the GPL'd bits are
> > segregated.
> 
> I hope you are being facetious.

BTW, not at all.


> I think that segregating code into separate areas just because of
> licensing restrictions, especially if those restrictions are as
> innocuous to the non-commercial "user", is rather silly and pointless
> exercise.

Maybe for you.  Having been in the position of being a commercial
user, and wanting to promote commercial use even though i'm no longer
a commercial user, I can tell you that your notion of how useful such
segregation is Wrong.


> It makes the build system more difficult to implement and debug.  It
> even makes reading the code more difficult in some cases.  I.e. it's not
> a technically clean solution.

Piffle.  Maybe it makes it a bit harder to CD into the right
directory, but if you're incapable of remembering what's where, use
cdpath or an equivalent.


> If segregation is the way to go then NetBSD
> should join FreeBSD in moving every piece of code that didn't originate
> with CSRG (or the foundation) into a totally separate "contrib"
> directory.

That's a reasonable idea, too; the annoying thing about that is that
all the stuff which has lived in 'GNU' ~forever then has to move.



cgd
-- 
Chris Demetriou - cgd@netbsd.org - http://www.netbsd.org/People/Pages/cgd.html
Disclaimer: Not speaking for NetBSD, just expressing my own opinion.