Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Apr 11 13:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
> >>their own terms?
> >
> >That's it, more or less.
> 
> I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
> was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
> gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
> newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
> Cygwin can't do the same.

BTAT in 2011.  IANAL, but the reason is the buyout clause which,
apparently, requires a certain amount of red tape while, incidentally,
funds a non-trivial amount of the time I can spend on Cygwin.

I'm just curious why you never asked the question while you were still
working at Red Hat.  Anyway, I asked again.  Times change so procedures
might change as well.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: pgprG9KY_yMJK.pgp
Description: PGP signature