Xref: utzoo comp.os.mach:36 gnu.misc.discuss:206
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!oliveb!mipos3!nate@hobbes.intel.com
From: nate@hobbes.intel.com (Nate Hess)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Query: Status of Mach cleanout?
Message-ID: <806@mipos3.intel.com>
Date: 28 Aug 89 04:29:27 GMT
References: <12720001@eecs.nwu.edu> <1311000001@upba> <MRD.89Aug25170616@sun.clarkson.edu>
Sender: news@mipos3.intel.com
Reply-To: woodstock@hobbes.intel.com (Nate Hess)
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 57
In-reply-to: mrd@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Michael DeCorte)

This has gotten a tad far-afield from taking about MACH, and so I've
redirected followups to gnu.misc.discuss

In article <MRD.89Aug25170616@sun.clarkson.edu>, mrd@sun (Michael DeCorte) writes:
[Talking about MACH.]

>I hope that Gnu doesn't get hold of it.  I have a problem with the Gnu
>licence basically it says that if I make changes to their program
>those changes become theirs.

This is simply not true.  You can take programs that the FSF has written
and distributes, hack them to your heart's content, and never tell
another soul that you've done so.  You certainly are under no obligation
to inform the FSF of any changes or additions you make to any of their
programs.

>If I spend a year and port Gnu emacs to
>the mac making a really cool port those changes are the preoperty of
>FSF and I can't sell this version of Emacs.  The result is that I
>won't ever so anything with anything of FSF.  I have written programs
>that are freely distributable but I will never give them to FSF for
>these very reasons.

You can sell a modified version of GNU Emacs at whatever price you want
to whomever you want.  You are simply required to also supply source
code to the version that you're selling.  And, you can't tell the people
you sell it to that they can't do whatever they want with it.

The FSF massively encourages the sharing of software.  You seem to
desire the same thing, and yet you find the FSF's policies distasteful.
I don't understand your position.

>I prefer the licencing of TeX much more.  It basically says that TeX
>belongs to Knuth but if you make changes to TeX those changes are
>yours and you can do with them as you please (including selling them).

>The result is that I can BUY a version of TeX that will have support.
>I can not do that with Gnu Emacs.  Nobody can sell it and things tend
>to get done fairly slowly if ever.

Once again, you are wrong.  There are companies that have added to
and/or changed GNU Emacs, and are now selling their version of it, along
with support.  In addition, I know there are many consultants who would
be willing to provide support for GNU programs.

I find your impression of "things tending to get done fairly slowly if
ever" rather puzzling; GNU Emacs is added to by thousands around the
world.  I've seen more new and useful changes for Emacs being posted to
the net every six months than I've seen out of nearly any commerical
product in years.  Necessity is indeed the mother of new Emacs code.

--woodstock
-- 
	   "What I like is when you're looking and thinking and looking
	   and thinking...and suddenly you wake up."   - Hobbes

woodstock@hobbes.intel.com   ...!{decwrl|hplabs!oliveb}!intelca!mipos3!nate