Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12100
	for pups-liszt; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:50:20 +1000 (EST)
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA12095
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:50:17 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA13307 for pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:50:42 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199808030150.LAA13307@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: The Unix Heritage Society
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:50:42 +1000 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <19980803111338.W21892@freebie.lemis.com> from Greg Lehey at "Aug 3, 98 11:13:38 am"
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Greg Lehey:
> On Sunday,  2 August 1998 at 18:28:56 -0700, David C. Jenner wrote:
> > I think he has a point here:
> >
> >   Restrict it to whatever the Ancient Unix license from SCO
> >   (and any equivalent licenses yet to emerge) covers.  In fact,
> >   an objective could be to try to ADD more systems from vendors
> >   (like Venix, even Xenix) who required the AT&T license.
> 
> That's rather conservative, isn't it?  If we had done that previously,
> there would never now have been an SCO licence for 16 bit UNIX.  If we
> do it now, there will never be a license for 32 bit UNIX.

Keep it to systems which require a UNIX source license, then?

	Warren

