Re: Is DragonFly using OSS 4.0?

["Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves" <justivo@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 8/17/07, Thomas E. Spanjaard <tgen@netphreax.net> wrote:
> It's still not BSD, and the CDDL is only marginally better than the
> GPL, imho.

Yes, and?  I believe it were the FreeBSD people who requested 4front
to let them use OSS as CDDL.  It doesn't mean it's a good license.
Hell, BSD is not a good license either.  But they both work.  Focus on
that.  I wish the world would work in the ideal way for everyone, but
it doesn't.

> As for those audio formats, we don't support any compression/storage
> format in base other than just raw audio streams.

That mention of OM formats was just a way of saying "good bye, take
care", but, silly me.  I always forget the hostility of free software
developers againt Open Media formats.

> And I don't think we
> ever intend to bundle third-party libraries with restrictive license.

With the what?  Restrictive?  I don't think you follow what us of Xiph
do.  Our specifications are in the Public Domain.  Our reference
libraries under the new BSD license.  Our tools under the LGPL.  Did I
mention that the formats themselves are patent-free and royalty-free?
Because I think you need to know that.

This thread wasn't about OM formats, but I think I had to reply to
your restrictive non-sense.

> What support for 'open media formats' do you expect from a base
> operating system?

On the kernel?  None.  It's a user-space thing.  But on DragonFly as a
distro?  Support out of the box would be appreciated.  But hey, easy
installation through pkgsrc is appreciated.  DF users just need to be
educated about the benefits of the formats.  If everyone thinks the
same way as Mr Spanjaard, we Xiph may as well give up already.

-Ivo