On Fri, 21 May 2004 18:31:44 -0400 Glenn Maynard wrote: > Of course, the "not comfortable" in the message you replied to was > referring to grandfathering, not to the freeness of the GPL, so it > didn't really make much sense as a reply.
Yes. Thank you for highlighting this (just in case it wasn't clear
enough).
To clarify once and for all:
I'm *not* against the GNU GPL.
Even if I see some of the issues that came up (like the one about clause
2c)...
I simply stated that I'm not quite happy if DFSG#10 is interpreted as
"these licenses are considered free, whatever they say".
As I said, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the `grandfathering' operation:
"we make exceptions" could become a slippery slope (hence my example of
a person who tries to persuade d-l to make an exception for his
favourite non-free license as well).
I'd be much more happy if the GNU GPL were ruled DFSG-free on the basis
of DFSG#1-9. That's it.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | You're compiling a program
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | and, all of a sudden, boom!
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | -- from APT HOWTO,
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | version 1.8.0
pgpmfSkf0sa3G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
