Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think you're obfuscating the meaning of that phrase. To me, it is > clear that he means that you can use the GNU GPL if you don't need to > incorporate LPRng into a commercial product.
As long as we don't have to be able to uphold our interpretation, I'd agree that this is probably what the author meant and what he *thinks* he's written. However, it's so badly and ambiguously expressed (e.g., all things being equal, the phrase "the GNU software license" could refer to GPL or LGPL or something third) that I think the package maintainer should contact the author and ask for clarification. -- Henning Makholm http://www.diku.dk/students/makholm
