On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Greg A. Woods wrote:

: I think that segregating code into separate areas just because of
: licensing restrictions, especially if those restrictions are as
: innocuous to the non-commercial "user", is rather silly and pointless
: exercise.

It's not ridiculous.  As far as `real' GPLed software is concerned, it's
pretty necessary.

The GPL reads, to paraphrase, that for any binary distribution you _must_ be
able to supply the associated sources, including all modifications, for (3
years?) after the distribution.  So vendors wishing to use NetBSD for
commercial purposes must provide a source tarball of at least all the stuff
under gnu/.  Think what this would mean logistically if all that was
sprinkled throughout the source tree.

This is not a reason to segregate all suspiciously licensed software, only
those that have a source-supply stipulation in the license.

-- 
-- Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Bus. todd_vierling@xn.xerox.com)