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.) -- Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. "jkinz@xxxxxxxx" is copyright 2003. Use is restricted. Any use is an acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
