Re: Is there a header conflict?

Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:53:16PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> No, it's promptly ignored because it's just useless words that require
> an implementation before it can be of any use to anyone.
> 
> I've been offering for several years now to mentor you through the
> process of developing a prototype that is useful to FreeBSD and to
> work with you on getting it accepted into FreeBSD, but as usual you're
> more interested in talking about how cool it would be to have, than in
> following through with code.

The code is trivial.

> The offer remains open...

I have an implementation.  Offer to let me sell it using the name
"FreeBSD" without it going back to the FreeBSD source code for a
year, and then maybe we can make a deal.  My problem with doing
productization work (and Brett Glass' problem, and a lot of other
people's problem) is, and remains, use of the trademark without
an identical-to-disc-1-disc-and-its-sucky-installer in the final
distribution.  I'd even be willing to accept a license like the
original soft updates license, where people other than me are not
allowed to distribute binaries for a year (give me a 1 year exclusive
on the ISO's I create).

FWIW: SCO released their Xenix packaging utilities *years* ago;
if FreeBSD were really interested in the technology, rather than
some schmuck taking over all the work with none of the money,
then they'd just take that code and use it directly.

I notice Jordan bowed out of this particular hole... smart guy,
Jordan.

-- Terry "Not A Schmuck" Lambert