On 5/13/24 04:22, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: >> I would make a big difference between what plan 9 is and what the licenses >> are. Software doesn't care about licenses. People do (and they should!). >> >> So what is plan 9 even? Can we compare it to UNIX™ or unix or posix? Who >> knows... >> >> I guess I could say a lot more about that topic, but I guess that's enough >> and you can puzzle everything else yourself. > > plan9 is simply the final release made by bell labs and now owned by p9f. > Thats not my interpretation this is a fact. Everything beyond that point is a > fork based on plan9. > > Everyone is allowed to derive his/her work from this provided version of > plan9. > > 9front is a fork, 9legacy is a fork and there were other forks. I have my own > fork. If tomorrow another one decides to fork plan9 than thats okay. > > 9front isn't plan9. 9front is a fork based on plan9. Why is it that you can't > accept this fact. You aren't the owners of plan9 and you don't even own the > trademark plan9.
By this line of logic the only thing stopping 9front from "being Plan 9" is recognition from the p9f no? That could theoretically change any day, the p9f still continues to hold meetings where such things could be decided. As others have pointed out I think an "official" classification is of little pragmatic benefit, but it would be nice to not have this tired conversation every email thread. Of course I have reason to believe that even if the p9f were to recognize 9front as being a "Plan 9" it still would not be good enough. ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tcf128fa955b8aafc-Md28a80fc0abf285efca61e42 Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
