Re: Darwin Streaming Server
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:32:22PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
> I think that this could be a problem when decising where we should put
> different software packages as there is ambuguity in certain
> cituations. I think it would be much better to use the free as defined
> by GNU.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
>
> And then there should be a list of all the licenses that are approved
> to be free. Like GLP, LGPL, Artistic, etc. etc... It's not evil to
> have freeware in non-free sections - it just alerts the user to _read_
> the license agreement. What is wrong with this approach?
Not all software is under a "standard" licence. That doesn't stop it
from being free. The DFSG is there as a measuring stick against which we
can compare licences we haven't seen before.
Also, Debian hasn't been a GNU project for years. We disagree with the
Free Software Foundation on some things, such as the status of the
Artistic License. Switching our definition of "free" by the back door
isn't a good way to resolve those disagreements.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: