Re: three send back changes clauses
>>Also, the court specifically said that "best effort"=="act in good
>>faith". I don't see how you say that someone who uses the software
>>but has no intention of ever contributing back changes (because their
>>boss told them not to) is acting in good faith. The software should
>>still not go in main.
>Fine, whatever, file the damn bugs against scheme <=7.4 then. Option C
>was clause 2 of the scheme license.
On debian, I could only find mit-scheme version 7.5. That release is
under the GPL, so there is no need for a bug report.
In any case, it would be useful to have a consensus on debian-legal
about this issue. Do you agree that the license makes it non-free, or
are you just tired of arguing?