From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23554 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2008 16:25:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 23525 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2008 16:25:27 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.logix-tt.com (HELO mail.logix-tt.com) (212.211.145.186) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:25:03 +0000 Received: from kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (84-72-190-27.dclient.hispeed.ch [84.72.190.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D286526B; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:26:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kingfisher.intern.logix-tt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B414E188234; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:25:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:26:00 -0000 From: Markus Schaber To: ecos-discuss@ecos.sourceware.org Message-ID: <20080404182500.38cfccd3@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> In-Reply-To: <20080404161251.GR7929@lunn.ch> References: <200804030937.m339bj00013603@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <200804032050.20913.neundorf@kde.org> <200804032228.m33MSkCg027848@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404104457.35553e0a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804040912.m349CrYq028389@mail176c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404114231.7efcf59a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804041000.m34A0Fto023055@mail175c2.megamailservers.com> <47F6470F.2080707@ecoscentric.com> <20080404180557.66980368@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <20080404180913.785f477c@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <20080404161251.GR7929@lunn.ch> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.12.9; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ECOS] Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos? X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00092.txt.bz2 Hi, Andrew, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > I just was told that the eCos copyright assignment is not to RedHat > > or eCosCentric, but to the FSF. > > > > That falsifies my statements about the RedHat sales droids, I presume, > > although there are still the "for other licenses, contact RedHat" > > statements scattered over the web and source. > > Yes, that statement is slowly being eradicated. When ever i touch a > file i tend to remove it. At some point we will wholesale remove the > rest, but that means touching nearly every file, so it is a big change > to CVS. So this is likely to happen at the same time we change the > Copyright notice to FSF which again needs to touch every file in the > repository. One of that statements is: | For information on obtaining alternative licences for JFFS2, see | http://sources.redhat.com/jffs2/jffs2-licence.html And that page on the web says "For information on obtaining alternative licences for JFFS2, contact Red Hat directly.". Maybe changing that information on the website is a quick&dirty way to break up the path of misleading statements. :-) Regards, Markus -- Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS Fight against software patents in Europe! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss