* Bernhard R. Link: > * Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081201 13:37]: >> * Bernhard R. Link: >> > And you think that once there will be hundreds of such renamed projects >> > of the same program which only have some patches that are not very >> > usefull for most people because of having to specific solutions and no >> > activity but some "please do not delete the project, I need the source >> > hosted to be able to run it" the hosting providers will just let this >> > go and not actively prune those pseudo-orphaned projects? >> >> Note that this becomes a non-issue if the work includes the capability >> to distribute itself. > > Because no user should have the right to fit programs into smaller > devices or even write a compiler for languages previously only interpreted?
Resource requirements have not traditionally been considered factors in judging software freeness. But you are right that the AGPL (and perhaps the GPL version 3 as well) fail my personal test for DRM-ness: A feature which, once added, cannot be legally removed, is DRM. However, I don't believe in adding random checks to the DFSG, so this is rather pointless. 8-/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]