From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
Subject: Re: SLS: now available (for testers)
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. CANADA
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 23:57:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.184115.27017@wixer.cactus.org> rhodesia@wixer.UUCP (Felix S. Gallo) writes:
>pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald) writes:
>>
>>Please go back and (re)read my first SLS posting.  In it I clearly
>>state that Softlanding will make C source available as per GPL, but that 
>>they discouraged it.  However, I expect few to want it because it would
>>be horrendously large.
>
>How 'available' will it be, considering the next paragraph in which

See below

>you say that you don't actually have the source yourself?  If I buy
>your distribution, will you then, at no extra cost, send me the
>source?  Didn't think so.
>>
>>You also seem to have erroneously assumed that I have such a source 
>>tree in my possession.  If so, it is incorrect.  SLS is a composite
>>of binaries that were posted (MCC, MJ, X11, and many miscellaneous) plus a
>>a pile I compiled.  As I told Ted, Softlanding will not, I repeat NOT
>>charge for any software/scripts/configurations it develops.  It charges
>>only for copy service.  If you find the stated price unacceptable, 
>>then please excercise your free market right to go elsewhere.
>>
>>To be clear, I have not, and will not, volunteer to set up a 
>>centrally administered source tree for Linux.  Although I am not denying
>>that there may be some merit to it, I just don't have the time (do you?).
>
>If you don't have time to comply with the GPL, then you're in the
>wrong business.
>
>>Instead, I did something that wasn't all that difficult [...]
>
>If it isn't all that difficult, then why are you balking at providing
>a (very easy to put together) source tree?  If you want to make money
>by distributing the software, you have to obey the rules which the
>software was written under.  Your laziness is no excuse.
>
>>If you want the source tree so bad, I suggest you either go to 386BSD or
>>you do it yourself.  I am a little taken aback, however, at your trying
>>to use the GPL to bully me into doing it.  I haven't the time.  But
>>I weighed what I could do, that would, in my opinion, benefit the
>>Linux community maximally.  I didn't really expect everyone would agree 
>>with that.
>
>Again, your laziness is no excuse.  If you don't have the time to do
>the job right, then don't do it -- you're not doing us or anyone else
>any favors.
>
>>BTW:  The Softlanding Distribution has one primary goal.  To remedy the
>>fact that Linux is not visible outside of electronic networks.  The hope
>>is to generate enough revenue to support advertising.  If it makes money
>>beyond that, then the owner of Softlanding (no, it is not me), will be 
>>pleased.  But I doubt personally that there will be enough demand to do that.
>

It will not be available at all.  Softlanding is withdrawing the distribution
service, and since no copies have been distributed as yet, none will
be hurt.  I will let the internet lawyers and philosophers hack out 
amongst, themselves what is "the right thing to do".  Leave me out of
it.  I have no time to deal with "contributors" like the above.
I only work on Linux out of a joy of hacking, not due to some
imagined heinous capitalistic bent.  But SLS is still available via ftp.

So, as before, if you have any constructive suggestions, not already
put forth, I would be pleased to hear them.