On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 08:08:18PM -0400, sean finney wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:47:26PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Therefore, all GPL'd programs will have to go to non-free. > > there's nothing that prevents us from re-distributing modified copies > of the GPL, we just can't do so and claim that they are the GPL. even > if you did want to nitpick that (why?), such a restriction is acceptable > according to the DFSG. for example, many authors choose to license > their software under a 'modified GPL' or 'GPL-with-some-exceptions'.
Er, no. The GPL can only be modified if the preamble is removed, which means the preamble is an invariant section. The *only* reason the text of the GPL is allowed in main is because including license texts is a fundamental, unavoidable requirement of distributing software at all, unless one limits oneself to public domain works. Adrian, you're deliberately wasting the project's time with a very old, eternity-since-debunked "argument". That's known as "trolling". Unless you have something of value to say, go away. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]