On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 08:31:38AM -0500, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Henning Makholm wrote: > > > Yes, probably. (Which, if the signals we've been getting from FSF the > > last few years are to be trusted, does not strike me as a bad thing at > > all). > > This issue is new to me. What are those signals? What are you talking about? Do > you have a URL that might help me get up to speed? I'm too tired to dig up the exact reference, but in a large heated discussion between Hans Reiser and many other people on d-devel last year (or maybe the year before) about removing or obscuring credits in mkreiserfs, Hans Reiser stated that he had information from RMS that there would be some sort of "invariant section"-like clause in GPLv3. Earlier than that, in a thread here on d-legal regarding the GFDL, RMS himself made a few sideways comments regarding the content of the GPLv3. More generally, the direction that the FSF appears to have been moving in the last few years has, in some peoples' eyes, been diverging somewhat from the "Debianistic" view of freedom. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature