On 02/17/2012 06:11 PM, MJ Ray wrote: > Jose Luis Rivas <ghostbar@debian.org> >> Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the >> OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) That way >> every one else knows which licenses are you talking about exactly. > > http://people.debian.org/~mjr/legal/fsf-osi-list-diff.txt > shows the ones where OSI and FSF disagree, but what's the > point of knowing which are involved? Basically, OSI has > aided proliferation. > > Regards Hi MJ, The point of my question is to give _context_. Which of the list are non-free and as a consequence wouldn't get software into main Debian's repositories. So are the ones that in an hypothetical Debian membership to OSI would need to be changed so that membership gets effective. That's what I understand from Josselin's email from: "I’m very worried to see Debian’s name used to condone licenses we would not accept." Which are those licenses? Regards. -- Jose Luis Rivas - GPG: 0x7C4DF50D / 0xCACAB118 The Debian Project Developer -- http://ghostbar.ath.cx Barquisimeto, Venezuela
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature