Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.

[Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>]

On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 11:56:03PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> If I understand correctly, you argue that DFSG #1-#9 should be
> interpreted in such a way to make the GPL free (because of, among
> other things, flamewars on -legal).  That makes DFSG #10 a no-op.  I
> argue that DFSG #10 enforces a particular interpretation.  DFSG #10 is
> thus a consistency check.  For those with the proper mindset, DFSG #10
> is thus a no-op.  I'm not sure that we're disagreeing about anything
> important.

I can't tell if your position is that DFSG#10 is a grandfathering clause
or that it's an interpretive guideline.  "Copyleft is only allowed because
it is explicitly grandfathered in by DFSG #10" seems to be the former;
that the GPL fails DFSG#1-9, but DFSG#10 overrides that.  Here, "I argue
that DFSG #10 enforces a particular interpretation" seems the latter; that
the GPL passes DFSG#1-9, due to DFSG#10.  These seem to be two very
different interpretations.

Could you clarify your position?

-- 
Glenn Maynard