On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 08:15:59PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 10:59:10PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 09:17:17PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > > > Providing a distribution platform for non-free software seems to greatly > > > moderate the incentive the non-free authors would have to relicense > > > their software under the GPL; it seems that the areas that we have been > > > successful already are testament to what we have the potential to do > > > were we to carry an even larger carrot and stick. > > > > Please provide examples. > > We're still missing those examples, please John.
Those examples are the things that have already happened, such as Qt. > You asked Craig Sanders to prove that our placing KDE in non-free helped > to have its license changed. Please provide proof that that change > would've occurred sooner if we hadn't packaged KDE at all, or an > equivalent example. I have not made that claim; I don't know why I should have to prove it. I see a lot of people saying that placing things in non-free was the cause of getting the license changed. I'm unconvinced that this is true and that the real cause is not simply exclusion from main. I made no claims about timeframe. -- John