1. 30
  1.  

  2. 14

    I’m not sure if everybody understands that this is a tongue-in-cheek response to the OpenSSL licence change: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=149028593819547&w=2

    1. 2

      When I first read it, I wasn’t sure if it was (it took me a re-reading to notice the subtlety).

      Update: It’s also more obvious if read in conjunction with this post to the openbsd-tech list.

      Update: Removed reference to 1 April

      1. 3

        Waiting for April 1 would let some people to stop at «oh right, it’s April 1» without getting the link with the original email, though.

        1. 1

          That’s true (I’ve updated my comment). And Theo was making a serious point, rather than playing a prank (and posting it on 1 April would make most think it’s a prank).

    2. 4

      Everyone deserves access to C technology without restriction, especially as rust makes inroads.

      Theo does not like Rust? Did he explain that further somewhere?

      1. 4

        I read it as simply a topical joke.

      2. 2

        Definitely a very courageous move!

        We develop an ISC-licensed compiler “scc” here at suckless.org, but with no doubt the entire ecosystem sadly is “infested” with GNU extensions, so we will have to stick with gcc in many cases. Let’s see how this license-change-attempt works out here.

        1. 17

          This is satire. If changing licences was this easy, licences and copyright would be meaningless.

          I hereby declare all works of Paramount, 20th Century Fox, and Sony Pictures to be in the public domain as of tomorrow, unless a rights holder objects. If the rights holders do not read lobsters, I am incredibly sorry but I will still follow through regardless.