Re: Is NPL DFSG complient or not?

[Martin Schulze <joey@kuolema.Infodrom.North.DE>]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>  Martin> If the NPL is DFSG complient, which I think it is according
>  Martin> to my memories, it should be listed in the DFSG/SC.
> 
> 	Why? We certainly do not want to list every licence which is
>  DFSG free as examples in the DFSG. I object to having to change the
>  DFSG every time a new license appears on the scene.
> 
>  Martin> If the NPL is not DFSG complient, I believe, we should state why we
>  Martin> don't consider it as DFSG complient.
> 
> 	It is DFSG compliant. It just is not one of the examples. The
>  examples are by no means considered to be an exhaustive and complete
>  list (It oes nt say: these are the only licenses we feel are
>  compliant, it just says here are some we feel are free). We should
>  not change the DFSG for something this trivial.

I agree to you.

However I believe that we should maintain a list of other licenses
that are DFSG free so people can look it up, don't have to worry, don't
have to care etc.  I'm not refering to every single license of every
program that uses a different license but to "commonly used" or famous
ones like BSD*, GPL, LGPL, Artistic, NPL, MPL etc.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
Linux - the choice of a GNU generation