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

Re: The Affero license



On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 12:03:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
> 
> > Clause 6 still doesn't come into play if the derived application is
> > released under the QPL itself, in which case one has the choice of
> > distributing under clauses 3 and 4 instead.
> > 
> > This is no worse than a GPL'ed library (of which Debian does
> > distribute a few).
> 
> Ok, I think you're right.  That means the QPL is not actually a
> problem, even if you object to all forced publication requirements.

Can someone spell this out (again?) for my crippled mind?

This might be good fodder for the FAQ.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    Yeah, that's what Jesus would do.
branden@debian.org                 |    Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgplNfF1iVzhc.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: