| To: | ports@openbsd.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Why were all DJB's ports removed? No more qmail? |
| From: | "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> |
| Date: | 29 Aug 2001 02:22:00 -0000 |
| Automatic-legal-notices: | Copyright 2001, D. J. Bernstein. My transmission of this message to you does not constitute a copyright waiver or any other limitation of my rights, even if you have told me otherwise. |
| Mail-followup-to: | ports@openbsd.org |
| References: | <20010828165021.14430.qmail@cr.yp.to> <200108281716.f7SHGBS21946@cvs.openbsd.org> |
| Sender: | owner-ports@openbsd.org |
Theo de Raadt writes: > We include a wrapper for it in the ports tree because they have a > non-discretionary licence. Nonsense. Netscape decides for itself what Netscape 4 modifications are allowed--- just as I decide what qmail modifications are allowed. Netscape hides the source code to discourage third-party patches. Netscape also has private commercial arrangements with several other companies. Despite all this, and despite all your sermons about freedom, you've been distributing Netscape 4 ports for years. Hypocrite. > > I checked ftp.openbsd.org yesterday, and it was still there. > And yesterday you claimed it was on the CD. Sorry. Either way, you've been distributing the package for years. ---Dan |
| Previous by Date: | new port update: graphics/gkrellkam, Dan Weeks |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Why were all DJB's ports removed? No more qmail?, D. J. Bernstein |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Why were all DJB's ports removed? No more qmail?, Theo de Raadt |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Why were all DJB's ports removed? No more qmail?B, Damien Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |