On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 4:16 AM, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The "problem" with the AGPLv3 is that you can argue the distribution > requirement is onerous. It may be a bit more onerous for a dissident Since anyone can get a free, anonymous account at any number of free VCS solutions, and since a dissident only need share source with those they're already permitting remote access over a network to, I do not see any situation where this would cause a problem. > but frankly we are talking about ridiculous costs here Really? Let's look at some options; BerliOS - free. Gna! - free. Launchpad - free. Savannah - free. Sourceforge - free (with advertising) All of these services are extremely stable, I believe all have been in operation for more than 3 years, and these are only the most popular. This is 2008, not 1998, nobody needs to pay to host free software anymore. <http://developer.berlios.de/> > As often stated on this list, you cannot always state the DFSG-freeness > of a license, you need to apply the rules to a *work*. If the sources > are several gigabytes large, then the price of distributing them becomes > unacceptable and the work may not be DFSG-free. I'll point out, again, the phrase "standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software" in section 13; it is neither standard nor customary for a modified version of code which is several gigs in size to be distributed in full. We upload a patch or create a VCS branch for our modifications and the license is fufilled.
