Sven Luther wrote: > I will ask upstream about this once they come back from vacations and have > them see if their legal team, even if bad, can offer us some answer. Maybe the > team working on the CECILL licence would also help here. What was the > conclusion of that discussion ? And if we don't agree with its freeness, would > it not be a good thing to contact them before they release other non-DFSG > licences ? I believe the conclusion for that license was that many of the clauses were non-free, but all of them were irrelevant because the license granted the permission to relicense under the GPL, and was therefore Free. There was the minor issue that the license didn't explicitly say what they referred to by "the GPL", but I don't believe that minor ambiguity affected the license's Freeness. There is also the point that only the French version was considered authoritative, so someone needs to check the French version to ensure it had the same permission grant for relicensing under the GPL. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature