Bind v. TinyDNS

[WipeOut]

Jeff Kinz wrote:

>On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 08:17:16PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
>  
>
>>Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 14:31, David C. Hart wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I have TinyDNS patched and running (if I want). Does anyone have any
>>>>strong feelings one way or the other vs Bind on Fedora C1?
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes, I do. As most if not all Dan J. Bernstein's software,
>>>
>>>  TinyDNS is NEITHER Free Software nor Open Source Software.
>>>
>>>Regards, Rui
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html
>>
>>djbdns is free and the source code is open.
>>    
>>
>
>Almost, but it misses by a hair. A teeny tiny hair.
>  
>
>>Just because it does not come with a license does not make any less so.
>>    
>>
>
>No - Please visit http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
>for a complete definition of what it means to be open source.
>
>Dr B's license (If you can find it which is the first problem :-)
>Seems to say that you cannot re-distribute his software (A requirement
>for the term "Open Source" to apply), but that you can distribute
>patches to his software.  A minor but significant restriction as
>you having to apply patches to access the modifications is not
>required with Open Source software.
>
>(seems to me that he might as well just let you re-distribute the whole
>thing if he's willing to let you distribute patches.)
>
>  
>
IIRC, his licence says that you can't re-distribute binary versions of 
his software but it can be re-distributed as source..

Later..