Re: one of the many reasons why removing non-free is a dumb idea
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 13:37, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-01-07 00:05:49 +0000 Andrew M.A. Cater
> <amacater@galactic.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > [...] As Craig said, the act of putting
> > a package into non-free has, in and of itself, sometimes led to
> > licence
> > changes.
>
> Can you give a reference for that,
smalleiffel, now smarteiffel, was an example. It went into non-free
while RMS negotiated with its authors until it became the GNU Eiffel
compiler (and is now in main).
--
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
========================================
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see
God." Matthew 5:8
Reply to: