"Francesco Poli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1. The GPLv3: the latest draft did not raise major objections from
-legal
I don't think that this is an accurate description of the discussion.
See http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not sure if I would charcterize my analysis as including major
objections, but rather some concerns.
I explicitly stated that I did n ot actually find DFSG problems, although
two complicated portions were not analyized.
So I would say I had concerns but not nessisrally objections.
Nevertheless, I would also say that my post is hardly consensus. So while no
major objections
may have been raised on list, it is also true that there is no real consenus
that the licence in its current draft
from does meet the DFSG. Impling that it does to the FSF is not a great
idea.
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
