On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:19:30PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: > > In which case a license of "if you change this you may not represent it > as RFCn" would be acceptable, no? > Perhaps a licence compatible with what I call the Pine Exception Clause[1] could be adopted for these docs ? Thoughts ? [1] That'd be DFSG 4 Integrity of The Author's Source Code