On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 02:07:06PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:16:09AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote: > > I don't *like* it (to the point that I'm willing to spend a large number of > > my own hours, working to convince people to switch for a 3-clause variety), > > but there is enough software in the world that falls under it, and enough > > room to manuever in terms of whether it's even enforceable (or more than > > GPL-incompatible in the most technical of senses, and compatible in RMS's > > declaration of intent) that I'd really hate to see us drop everything that > > uses it, much as I'd hate to see us drop everything that could potentially > > have a patent on it - for much the same reason. > > How about, once the 4.1.5 vote is done, we try to amend the DFSG to say > that no future software using the advertising clause will be permitted > into Debian? How about we find any software that still has the advertising clause and aim to chuck it out of the archive? It can't be that difficult by now. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature