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

Re: QPL and non-free

Francesco Poli <frx@winstonsmith.info> wrote:

> That is completely irrelevant. The FSF doesn't use the DFSG as freeness
> guidelines.

But the DFSG are intended to be a more detailed description of what free
software (a term initially defined by the FSF) is. If the DFSG are
wildly divergent from the FSF's viewpoint, we need to figure out how and
why. Having two different definitions of free software does nothing to
help the community.

Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org

Reply to: