Re: Is DragonFly using OSS 4.0?

["Thomas E. Spanjaard" <tgen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves wrote:
> 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.

My point was, audio is a major subsystem of the kernel, and replacing 
that with something that's more restrictively licensed than BSDl is 
rather limiting towards people who might want to use DragonFlyBSD to the 
limits allowed by the BSD license(s).

> > 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.

I'm not against open media formats, but I just wanted to inform you that 
we do not ship with any codec, and I at least don't intend to. We don't 
ship with a graphical user interface either, leaving all that choice to 
the user.

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

I meant to say 'licenses'. I guess we do though, for some stuff.

> 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.

I know bits of what Xiph does, like icecast2 and theora; I didn't know 
you were part of that project. It pleases me to learn about your 
licensing policies though. However, I don't think anyone will add it to 
base, because it incurs additional maintenance overhead, and a base 
system is just that, base. We leave a lot of choices for the user, and I 
like that :).

> > 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.

For one, DragonFly is *not* a distro. It's an operating system in it's 
own right. You would call DesktopBSD or PC-BSD a distro of FreeBSD, but 
DragonFly is a fork. Our userspace is decidedly lean, e.g., no graphical 
user interface provided by default, no abundance of shells, mailer, 
hypertext or name daemons to choose from, etc.

Regarding 'educating' users: you're treading on dangerous territory 
there. I'd much rather have everyone decide what's 'good' and what's 
'evil' for themselves, rather than being educated about it by someone 
according to that person's opinion. Now I do agree that open media 
formats are definitive plus, I oppose forcing that opinion on others.

Best regards,
--
        Thomas E. Spanjaard
        tgen@netphreax.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature