Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > We want to have freedom over what we distribute in "binary" packages. > We are willing to tolerate noxious restrictions like the TeX ones only > because they do not impact what we can distribute in the binary > package: they only restrict the hoops that the source package must go > through to do create the binary package. > > That is a very clear place to draw the line, but I think it rejects a > range of licenses, for software programs as well as for documentation, > that we could accept.
Which licenses (for programs)?
