On Sun, Dec 23, 2007, moayyad sadi wrote: > This is posted to both docs and developer mailing lists > please each discuse the related license to your mailing list only > (in doc GFDL and alike, in dev GPL and alike) > > I'm having problems with radical people in Debian who consider > GNU *Free* Documentation License (GFDL) > not free engough for them
Not every GFDL in not free enough according to Debian Free Software Guidelines: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free According http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 > I'm thinking of a license just like GPL but the this extra term: > * degrading authentication procedures IS NOT PERMITTED, > inauthentic (or impure or inconsistent) software as defined by the > original author or > according to original software checking procedure (GPG) should always > appear as impure or inconsistent in the derived work. This won't be a free license as soon as some kind of modification is prohibited. It is the same with limitation of use ("legal"). > I have a question does any use of terms in Artistic license satisfy DFSG > or is it conditional like GFDL The Artistic license satisfies the DFSG (see DFSG#10 on http://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html). -- Mohammed Adnène Trojette _______________________________________________ Developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/developer
