On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 01:49:06AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > Wasn't this issue solved in Apache License Version 2.0?
The license, yes, but a quick look at /usr/share/doc/apache2/copyright shows some pieces that still use the old one. I havn't looked to see how much. > If this is case, the most 'critical' package that still has this kind of > non-freeness seems to be php... That's a matter of perspective, of course--Subversion is more important to me. (By the way, though I don't think it's currently critical to the thread, Subversion has the restriction "nor may "Tigris" appear in their names". "Tigris" != "Subversion".) > And yes, I think it's a battle worth fighting, 'cause a DFSG-free PHP > would benefit Free Software and Debian users, but PHP is not DFSG-free, > currently... You're saying "this is onerous enough to make it non-free" (aka "it's a battle worth fighting") "because it's non-free". That's not a very persuasive argument. :) -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]