Fascinating interview by Richard Stallman at KTH on emacs history and internals
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
ldo at geek-central.gen.new_zealand
Sun Jul 18 02:49:33 EDT 2010
In message
<bd2d1d84-6090-4898-b7c2-59167fc8e1f5 at c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, Nick Keighley wrote:
> On 16 July, 09:24, Mark Tarver <dr.mtar... at ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 15 July, 23:21, bolega <gnuist... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/stallman-kth.html
>>
>> > RMS lecture at KTH (Sweden), 30 October 1986
>
> did you really have to post all of this...
>
> <snip>
>
>> > read more »...
>
> ...oh sorry only about a third of it...
Still totally unnecessary, though.
>> Perhaps as an antidote
>>
>> http://danweinreb.org/blog/rebuttal-to-stallmans-story-about-the-formation-of-symbolics-and-lmi
In other words, software that was developed at Symbolics was not given
way for free to LMI. Is that so surprising?
Which is conceding Stallman’s point.
Anyway, that wasn’t Symbolics’s “plan”; it was part of the MIT licensing
agreement, the very same one that LMI signed. LMI’s changes were all
proprietary to LMI, too.
I don’t understand this bit. The only “MIT licensing agreement” I’m aware
off _allows_ you to redistribute your copies without the source, but doesn’t
_require_ it.
More information about the Python-list
mailing list