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

Re: [Steve Lidie <Stephen.O.Lidie@Lehigh.EDU>] Re: xodometer licensing

On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:

>John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu>:
>> >Well, I don't think it's a free license for similar reasons as RMS.
>> >Mostly because it's very vauge in places, and references things that
>> >it really shouldn't in others.  Examples:
>> I doubt it.  RMS's REAL reason is that it isn't his GPL.  Look at how many
>> unequivocally free licenses fall under his definition of non-free.  Hell
>> the most free license in existence, the original BSD "do whatever you
>> want, just don't bother us or plagiarize" license was considered by RMS to
>> be non-free.
>When? Where?

About the time that Debian was still part of the FSF...


For every problem there is one solution which is simple, neat, and wrong.
-- H. L. Mencken

John Galt (galt@inconnu.isu.edu)

Reply to: