Re: New CUPS license violates DFSG 6?
> > Previously Peter Makholm wrote:
> > > I think there are consensus for allowing positive discrimination.
On 14 May 2002, Henning Makholm wrote:
> The reasoning is that it would be absurd to call license A free and
> license B non-free if every recipient has at least as much freedom
> with license B as he has with license A.
Quite. As long as derived works can be distributed under pure GPL, I
can't imagine any claim that it's non-free.
That said, if the cups developers don't like the fact that the GPL doesn't
allow linking to non-free components, they should change the license
rather than making a specific exception. LGPL would be my first
suggestion to them. Not required for DFSG freedom, just required for
Mark Rafn firstname.lastname@example.org <http://www.dagon.net/>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org