Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >Unfortunately the QPL is not a free license (although the >> Fortunately, most people disagree. > > The lurkers support me in email
While I won't actually try to use this as an argument of fact, the majority of people I've spoken to about this don't feel happy about declaring the QPL non-free. It's also worth noting that historically we've tended to agree with the FSF over whether a software license is free or not. The fact that this has started to change recently suggests that somebody's opinion is changing. (The fact that the FSF declared the QPL a free software license really quite a long time ago may offer some insight into who's changing here) -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
