Re: New CUPS license violates DFSG 6?
Sam Hartman wrote:
> It means that Apple does not need to include source for anything with
> their primary OS CDs. Apple is trying to avoid anything GPLed or
> LGPLed in the parts of the OS they pre-install. There of course GPL
> and LGPL components in the developer tools.
If I remember correctly, there was a version of GNU Emacs shipped with
Mac OS X 10.1.
My take on this is that; well, non-copyleft free licenses like the X
license are usually GPL-compatible because anyone can make a GPL:ed
fork. This licence, as written, would not be GPL-compatible (I think),
and wouldn't we be happier with a dual licence situation? Like "You
may distribute this under the terms of the GPL, or, if you're an Apple
This license seems DFSG-free, though.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com