[Mono-list] Re: C# class library

Norbert Bollow nb@freedevelopers.net
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:22:17 +0200

  we will of course have to check with our lawyers on this
matter, but let me first double-check to make sure that I
understand you correctly.  Do I understand you correctly that

  If we consider it to be an unacceptable legal risk to rely on
  code that has been created by following a procedure like it is
  outlined in that "How to Reverse Engineer and still be Legal"
  article,  then we should not rely on the Mono C# class library.


Greetings, Norbert.

> X-From_: freedev@zeissikon.com  Fri Aug 17 18:04:12 2001
> X-Envelope-To: <bollow@cyberlink.ch>
> X-Real-To: <bollow@cyberlink.ch>
> Sender: miguel@ximian.com
> Cc: mono-list@ximian.com, developers@dotgnu.org, coreteam@dotgnu.org
> From: Miguel de Icaza <miguel@ximian.com>
> Date: 17 Aug 2001 12:00:30 -0400
> > The C# class library is a key component for DotGNU and we cannot
> > afford to take the risk of relying on Mono's class library
> > unless we have very good reasons to believe that there are no
> > risks of the kind that some court might decide that we have to
> > stop using it.  We really need to have evidence that this
> > library has been properly cleanroomed, otherwise we cannot rely
> > on it.
> I am not sure you understand exactly what cleanroom implementation
> means. 
> Please read:
> 	http://www.advogato.org/article/302.html
> Regarding DotGNU, I would suggest that you ask yourself `does our
> current code match the criteria in that mail?' and then ask yourself
> `Do we have a written record of our code being a clean room
> implementation?' and then ask yourself `Have we talked to our lawyers
> to understand the problem?'.
> Miguel.