Subject: Re: Optimal license for Java projects ...
From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 00:58:29 -0500 (EST)

David Johnson scripsit:

> What caused the previous preponderance of incompatible proprietary X 
> implementations? I would point the finger not at the license but at the 
> Open Group, who could never make up their mind if they wanted the code 
> to be free or not. It seems to me that they actually encouraged 
> proprietary forks. 

AFAIK that was the whole point: a common core shared among the members,
and then each to compete on the enhancements, the same as (proprietary)
Unix itself.  But it was too hard to nail down exactly what the terms
should be on the common core, and the XC ended up using a completely
toothless license: the peace of exhaustion.

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@ccil.org
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
        --_The Hobbit_
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3