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

Re: license questions.

Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 06:15:07PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Another example is that RMS considers the original (unclarified)
> > Artistic License too ambiguous to be free, while we list it as an
> > example of a DFSG-free licence.
> I wish we could back away from that.  RMS is dead right on that point.

I agree, and note that so much code Artistic licensed code is really
dual-licensed under the GPL that cleaning up our stance on the Artistic
license would not be the disaster it might at first appear.

see shy jo

Attachment: pgpBJunvlShlf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: