"Nathan E Norman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:28:13PM -0600, Kirk Strauser wrote: > > > > At 2002-11-18T21:11:23Z, Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Uh, of course tinydns (sic; it's really djbdns) is open source. Perhaps > > > you meant to say _DFSG Free_ ? > > > > No more than Microsoft's "shared source" is open source. I can't > > redistribute either of them, regardless of what bugs I patch or features I > > add. > > You can distribute patches to djdns all day long. You can even > distribute a patched version if you don't call it "djbdns". What you > can't do (and this is why djb stuff fails the DFSG) is distribute a > pre-compiled version with your patches applied. > > Comparing DJB to MS is disingenuous and you know it. Oh well, a > little demagoguery seem the status quo on debian lists.
Just curious, on which list(s) isn't a little dg. status quo? ;) Gary -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
