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

Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     We want to have freedom over what we distribute in "binary" packages.
>     We are willing to tolerate noxious restrictions like the TeX ones only
>     because they do not impact what we can distribute in the binary
>     package: they only restrict the hoops that the source package must go
>     through to do create the binary package.
> That is a very clear place to draw the line, but I think it rejects a
> range of licenses, for software programs as well as for documentation,
> that we could accept.

Which licenses (for programs)?

Reply to: