[self-followup] On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 06:09:08PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > It is, however, worth noting that many subtle variations of the MIT/X11 > license exist. That the traditional MIT/X11 license is (by > general consensus, I daresay) DFSG-free, that any license derived from it > is also DFSG-free. There are some missing words in the above. Here's what I meant to say: That the traditional MIT/X11 license is (by general consensus, I daresay) DFSG-free, does not mean that any license derived from it is also DFSG-free. -- G. Branden Robinson | There's something wrong if you're Debian GNU/Linux | always right. branden@debian.org | -- Glasow's Law http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature