On Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 04:04:35PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen wrote: > > > The same as for using FreeBSD itself: it's got a nasty BSD license. > > > > Er, the BSD license is still DFSG free, last I checked. > > Just about all objections against BSD licenses fall in two categories: > 1) It can be assimilated > 2) It has the nasty advertisement clause. See > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html > > I suspect John was talking about the second (he's speaking about /a/ nasty > BSD license, not /the/ nasty BSD license). > > Many people prefer BSD-sans-ad-clause to the old BSD license. Based on my thousands of arguments with John on this very subject many many times over, I would say that his problem with the BSD is the former as he also considers the X license to be "nasty" because it can be exploited. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE The Source Comes First! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I think that most debian developers are rather "strong willed" people with a great degree of understanding and a high level of passion for what they perceive as important in development of the debian system." --Bill Leach
Attachment:
pgpZEHgZtc51Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature