On 1/28/19 4:23 AM, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote: > IMHO - as Kern (Bacula lead developer) is pushing Bacula forward I dont understand this too. It must be > a misinformation about the current status of the project itself and competitors interests (Bareos). There's probably going to be a lot of misinformation where bareos is concerned. The developers forked that product claiming that when they signed license assignments they didn't know that this could or would allow Bacula to begin a dual-license release in which some features were added to a separate proprietary release. Bacula's developers claim that the fork included code that was not licensed to them. Their lawsuit was settled with undisclosed terms. Given what information is available publicly, I am inclined to believe that the fork was in the wrong, but users are often more concerned with protecting people that they like than they are in license compliance.