On Thu, Aug 26, 1999 at 11:44:47PM +0200, Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona wrote: > > > Probably I'm missing something, but BSD+GPL seems similar to > > > QtL+GPL (with respect to incompatibility) > > > > 4 clause BSD yes. > > > > X/MIT no since you can literally add the GPL to the top of the list of > > copyrights and the whole thing is for all intents and purposes under the > > GPL. > > > > The actual BSD license is no longer 4 clause, BTW. => Apparently the FSF > > had a hand in that. > > Good to know that clause 4 is no longer in BSD license... I > guess that in that case, copyright files for affected packages should > be changed... Only for those coming from UC Berkeley. Apache for example is not affected. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <Knghtbrd> you people are all insane. <Joey> knight: sure, that's why we work on Debian. <JHM> Knghtbrd: get in touch with your inner nutcase.
Attachment:
pgpMQ1i6HWfmR.pgp
Description: PGP signature