treese@crl.dec.com (Win Treese) (08/15/90)
In article <846@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes: > Why is it that the Mach developers often seem to find time to comment here > upon various Mach-related technical questions, but they never seem to take > the time to answer questions regarding the legal status of "Mach: The Product". It's not a matter of "time to answer questions". It's a matter of having something to say. The technical questions can be answered. Legal issues are usually much harder to deal with, and often one can't say much more than "we're working on it." While I'd like to see an unencumbered Mach distribution, I sympathize with those trying to sort out the issues. Win Treese Cambridge Research Lab treese@crl.dec.com Digital Equipment Corp.
Rick.Rashid@CS.CMU.EDU (08/16/90)
Perhaps all the mail on this list is not making it through. I responded to the original message (Re: when...) but I've never seen the message (Deafening...) so I can't comment on its contents. It is, however, quite true that legal issues are not nearly so easy to deal with as technical ones.