--On Monday, February 28, 2011 5:43 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
<wie...@porcupine.org> wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
>> Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the
>> IPL?
>
> The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released.
> With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable
> for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good
> arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers.
Hi Wieste,
Please, spell my name correctly. Thank you.
Sorry, I apologize. Particularly as someone who sees my own name often
misspelled. ;)
I see that the CPL has in fact been replaced with the EPL. Do the BSD
folks find it as objectionable as well? If not, then if you do look
into re-licensing postfix, perhaps the EPL would be a better solution.
I don't run to the IP laywers for each iteration of the IBM license
agreement, nor do I run to the OpenBSD people to ask for their opinion.
I would need to hear really good reasons before I change this
position. I don't care if one flavor of "you must release source
code" is better than another flavor. If I had the choice it then
would be the same BSD licence that I slapped on my older tools.
The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link
Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality.
I also think that the "flavor" option has some importance. If it allows
Postfix to be more widely used in a way that is comfortable to IBM, then I
think that is a good thing.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
