lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

On 8/24/2011 11:08 PM, Axel Kittenberger wrote:
Sorry, thats not true. The binary is obviously a 'substantial portion
(derived from) "the Software"". Any research I did regards the Expat
License (here so called "the MIT License") to be effectively exactly
equal to the 2-clause BSD (without the no-endorse-clause). This
includes the opinion of the FSF as well e.g. the OReilly-Book The BSS one is
written more precise in this regards: Redistributions of source code
must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and
the following disclaimer. Redistributions in binary form must
reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions"

Its another forth and back pendelum: People whine, "so much words, so
complicated, no one understands it", than you come up with a short
concise one, people whine "so ambitious, can't it be more clear what
it means if this and that and thus condition?".

The "derived from", if one insist on choosing that implication, changes the scope, it is no longer the same statement. A binary is a transformation; it is not the same entity.

OK, sorry I tried, I give up, you fellows enjoy yourselves. I will end this here.

Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia