Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wesley J. Landaker writes: > >> Readers should also note that the FSF believes[1] that the QPL is a free >> license; but it's not GPL compatible. > > This does not mean a lot. They believe the same thing of the GNU FDL, > but the FDL is non-DFSG-free in the general case.
I don't think the FSF have ever claimed that the GFDL would class as a free software license. Their standards for free documentation licenses are clearly different to the DFSG. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
