Facts about Netscape's source release

[Mike Shaver <shaver neon ingenia ca>]

There is one very simple truth about the terms of the Netscape source
license: anyone who tells you at this point that they know what it's
going to be is lying to you.

Netscape has not, as of this writing, settled on a license.  If
someone tells you that Netscape will be GPL'ing it, they're guessing.  If
someone tells you that Netscape will be releasing it under a BSD
license, they're guessing.  If someone tells you that Navigator won't
be `free' software, and they define `free' in anything other than
probabilistic terms, they're guessing.

Help free Navigator: write me (shaver@netscape.com) with your polite,
well-reasoned explanation of why Netscape should use the GPL.  Only
the most incredibly entertaining Microsoft bashing will even be read
to the end, so save yourself the trouble.  Don't worry about saying
the same thing that everyone else is saying; consensus is a powerful
tool.

Also, if you have references regarding:
- other companies doing this, or
- conflict between ITAR anality and GPL source-release requirements, or
- dynamically-loaded binary code and the `mere aggregation' clause,
send them as well.

And please, out of respect for Miguel and the rest of the
actively-developing GNOME team, try to keep discussions of Netscape's
source release policy on topic.  Crap on the list just makes it that
much less pleasant to co-ordinate or contribute, and GNOME is too
important for that.

ObGNOME: There is already a mailing list regarding a GTK port of
Navigator, and it is being actively followed by Netscape.  I believe
that Elliot has more information, and there will be more information
coming from Netscape tomorrow.  Check the home page and/or
www.openscape.org for updates.

Mike

-- 
#> Mike Shaver (shaver@ingenia.com) Ingenia Communications Corporation 
#>                 Ignore the man behind the curtain.                  
#>                                                                     
#> "And then I realized that it never should have worked in the first  
#>  place.  Thus, it would not work again until rewritten." --- Anon.