Daniel, you'll probably be happier if you set a Mail-Followup-To header to ensure you're CC'd.
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now, with a release only 23 days away (isn't this better already?), > we've hit a speedbump. It's been alleged in Debian circles that the > XFree86 autoconfig code is non-free[0], and I've filed a release-blocker > bug on X.Org[1] accordingly. Well, there's only one potential problem: > * Except as contained in this notice, the name of the copyright holder(s) > * and author(s) shall not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote > * the sale, use or other dealings in this Software without prior written > * authorization from the copyright holder(s) and author(s). That's clearly GPL-incompatible -- I don't know that that's a problem for the relevant code, but I'd imagine it would be for *some* X code. I think it's right on the border of freedom, but on the non-free side of that border. It prohibits some true statements -- if I'm trying to sell some kiosk to a third party, and he asks me who wrote the autoconfig code, I *can't tell him*. That seems pretty weird, in a situation in which I allegedly have freedom. I can't even put "Copyright 2004 Ben Bitdiddle, some parts Copyright 200x David Dawes" in there. Heck, I can't even write this message, talking about how great X.Org's software is and how much I love the autoconfig stuff by David Dawes! This very paragraph violates that license. Surely that can't be Free. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
