On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 10:43:47AM -0500, Alex Yukhimets wrote: > > of it ? if yes i think this is ok, but as i understood thinks up to now, is > > that for a library to be free you also have to have free developpement tools > > for it. Also i think that the QPL don't agree with the non discrimination > > clause of the DFSG, altough i wish some more informed person would look into > > it. > > I agree with you completely. Though my opinion probably will not be > accepted by the majority of developers. I think that GPL'd libraries are > NOT FREE. (Even in DFSG sense). QPL'd libary is not free for the same reason. Of course, I disagree. There are times when GPL is the right license. There are times also when LGPL or even BSDish would be better. For those afraid of BSDish, there's Artistic which I think is a great license personally. In the end, it's the author's choice. -- Show me the code or get out of my way.
Attachment:
pgp_91mhe87Ta.pgp
Description: PGP signature