On 12/15/07, David H. Lynch Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After reveiwing the OpenBSD Goals and Polices, it appears to me that > the intent is that OpenBSD should be a free/Open Source system. But > unless I am missing something that is not actually made clear. The
"Copyright law is complex, OpenBSD policy is simple - OpenBSD strives to maintain the spirit of the original Berkeley Unix copyrights." how much clearer can it be? > Would proprietary software with source be acceptable ? The what is this? > It is possible to read all of this and conclude that OpenBSD is a > free OS and that non-free software is unacceptable - including > prohibiting non-free URL's in ports. It is also possible to understand > this as allowing the inclusion - even in the kernel of code that does > not even meet the weak OSI definition of Open Source. do you know what the words "freely redistributable" mean? "non-free URLs" are freely redistributable. and who cares what OSI says? it's just a bunch of clowns dicking around to approve the latest license of the week.
