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

Re: QPL and non-free

Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Francesco Poli <frx@winstonsmith.info> wrote:
>> That is completely irrelevant. The FSF doesn't use the DFSG as freeness
>> guidelines.
> But the DFSG are intended to be a more detailed description of what free
> software (a term initially defined by the FSF) is. If the DFSG are
> wildly divergent from the FSF's viewpoint, we need to figure out how and
> why. Having two different definitions of free software does nothing to
> help the community.

Argh, sorry. This should have been on -legal

Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.devel@srcf.ucam.org

Reply to: