Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Debian has labelled a license with serious, onerous practical problems free.
Labelling licences 'free' means little, as the FSF demonstrated with the ironic name of the FDL. What matters is whether the software under that licence is free software. The practical problems beyond the DFSG have always been something we commented in, but not a direct freedom problem themselves. The FSF used to do this too - see their criticism of obnoxious advertising clauses - instead of using advertising clauses like now. > The obvious consequence is that any license with similar practical problems > will also be considered free, and--going one small step further--licenses > with serious problems in general will be considered free. > > This GR has tainted the "DFSG-free" label, probably permanently. [...] I think that's a pessmistic, melodramatic interpretation and I hope you're wrong. More pragmatically, "DFSG-free" was a stupid label for licences which helped add to the confusion over whether it was the licence or the liberty of the software and users that mattered to us. If this GR kills it and lets us return to talking about whether software is free software or not, then it's done one good thing. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]