On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:18:35 +0100 Bill Allombert wrote: > I moved the discussion to debian-vote where it belongs. > (please CC me). Bill, I appreciate this effort to solve the GNU AfferoGPL issue. I agree with you that works released under the terms of the GNU AfferoGPL v3 do not meet the DFSG: my own personal opinion was previously stated on this list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/11/msg00233.html There were other threads on debian-legal about this topic, as you probably know. Anyway, I am not sure that a GR is the best tool to solve this issue. Please compare with the GR about the GFDL and its (absurd) outcome... [...] > 1) Someone might want to reuse part of some AGPL software in a completly > different work. For example, a AGPL-licensed blog system might include a > code that implement an authentification scheme that you want to reuse in your > POP3 server. If a license actively prevent you from doing that, then it is > non-free. This argument should really be stressed, since, AFAICT, many people tend to underestimate the probability and importance of code reuse in the Free-Software-centric ecosystem. -- New location for my website! Update your bookmarks! http://www.inventati.org/frx ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgp15yLi4u7wS.pgp
Description: PGP signature