[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Darwin Streaming Server

On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:32:22PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
> And then there should be a list of all the licenses that are approved to be free. Like GLP, LGPL, Artistic, etc. etc... It's not evil to
> have freeware in non-free sections - it just alerts the user to _read_ the license agreement. What is wrong with this approach?

I think it is much better to go along the way of opensource.org. It is DFSG
compatible and a widely accepted Free Definition. GNU is not know to be very

For example freedom 1 is not compatible with BSD licenses. In fact the Free
definitions aim to define the GPL, which is not, what we want to use for all

Note for example defining a License as GPL compatible means the GPL can
infect the code and "swallow" the license terms...


PS: my definition of liberal is a different one from rms. while i say
something is more liberal if it has less restrictions, rms thinks it is more
liberal if it forces others to place less restrctions on it. But are valid
views, I prefer the commercial friendly view :)

Reply to: