>We have very similar project goals to NetBSD. It appears we take them
>more seriously.

You make this statement, and yet call his comment pure slander?

>I, for one, would very much know how you solved this internally to NetBSD,
>why it went through `core@' and not elsewhere,

Chances are, that's what he considered to be a contact point for 
tnf...but I'm in no way affiliated with tnf (other than a user) nor 
Darren.

>I also really would like to know why you consider the BSD licence to be
>such an eeeeviiil thing wrt IPF.

I don't recall reading where he called it evil...he just didn't 
happen to adopt it wrt his program. I don't consider Chevy to be 
evil, but I currently drive a Dodge.

>I think there are numerous cases of other software (Luke Newburn's ftp,
>to take one prominent NetBSD program, for instance) released under the BSD
>licence without any problem of people getting credits where credits are
>due.

He simply wishes that people or foundations who wish to use *his* 
property abide by *his* license. ipf is his property & as such, 
anyone wishing to have the functionality has 4 options:
1) abide by his license
2) make another arrangement with him for a mutually-agreeable license
3) find an alternative
4) *make* an alternative
So my suggestion is do one of the following 4 & quit b*tching about it.

>Of course, if you don't want to write free software, then there's no
>possible settlement.

And in this thread, everyone must take their digs.

Again, I have no connection with netbsd, freebsd, openbsd, or Darren. 
I just happen to run netbsd on a couple systems.

Mike
-- 
Michael G. Schabert, Mac Guy
Miranda Graphic Systems, publishers of Graphic Power
http://www.graphicpower.com