Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > *D R A F T* > > Debian licence summary of the Common Public License version 1.0 > I suppose the lack of response implies that nobody agrees with my > summary. Please indicate why: > [ ] What a load of drivel! You're trying to be holier than RMS. > [ ] Good grief! Next you'll be saying Qmail and Opera belong in main. > [ ] Type error! Balanced opinions not allowed in @lists.debian.org.
[ X ] Insufficient time. My previous comments about licence summaries being Evil Bad and Wrong hold. Given this is about graphviz in particular, why not summarise just graphviz's situation? I also think you are predicting the future in several places without making clear the basis for those claims. That's up to you, but I don't have the data to endorse those predictions. The body of the summary looks fine, but I wasn't watching closely enough to know whether it's accruate, it gives no references and I don't have enough time to reread all that email right now. I hope that explains my lack of support for this summary in a way you (or someone else) might use to improve it. -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
