On 12/11/2009 04:38 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:14:40 +0530, Rahul wrote:
> On 12/11/2009 03:56 PM, Florian Festi wrote:
>> Without knowing the history:
>>
>> Best solution would be to ask former upstream for permission to continue
>> the project under its original name
>
> That was already denied
>
>
https://lists.feep.net:8080/pipermail/libtar/2009-May/000259.html
Don't call it denial, though, because libtar is licensed under terms
similar to MIT/BSD (with no advertising clause) [1]. This alone gives many
permissions. See the license text for the details.
Sure but my comment has nothing to do with the license but the name of
the project.
The real reason not to use the "libtar" namespace for a
fork are
others.
If a upstream developer requests anyone not to use the same name for
continuing maintenance of a project, then regardless of the license, it
would only be polite not to do so setting aside everything else.
Rahul