Re: TAO license - Debian misinterpretation
- To: Debian-Devel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: TAO license - Debian misinterpretation
- From: Oscar Levi <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:41:16 -0800
- Message-id: <19981214124115.F17178@hazel.buici.com>
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981214211309.7247Bfirstname.lastname@example.org>; from Santiago Vila on Mon, Dec 14, 1998 at 09:18:13PM +0100
- References: <Pine.GSO.email@example.com> <Pine.LNX.3.96.981214211309.7247Bfirstname.lastname@example.org>
On Mon, Dec 14, 1998 at 09:18:13PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I can still write free software using GPLed code fragments.
> I can't write free software using TAO fragments, because TAO itself
> forbids me to do so. I think there is a big difference.
> > I can't imagine why anyone would want
> > to deviate from the standard and begin yet another development fork.
> I can, but if you can't imagine and the authors can't imagine, why don't
> they remove this restriction from the license? ;-)
Isn't is also important to recognize what 'main' means? If we say
that 'main' requires permission to modify and redistribute then
there's nothing to discuss. If we put it in 'main' then we are
deceiving our users.