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

Re: AT&T source licence?

On Sat 3 March 2000, at 15 h 52, the keyboard of Henning Makholm 
<henning@makholm.net> wrote:

> > interested in is under this licence. Does anyone know it? It seems clearly 
> > non-free, but not too much non-free :-}
> We have discussed it before. 

A list of non-free licences, as well as the reasons they are non-free could be 
useful. rms would certainly blame us to advertise non-freeness, but it could 
be useful.

> Any kind of nonfreeness is too much.

I agree it is for the "non-free" archive. But does anyone see a larger problem, which would prevent it to get into Debian?

Reply to: