On 26/04/12 14:58, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 26/04/12 11:07, Don Clugston wrote:
<rant>
"open source" is a horrible, duplicitous term. Really what you mean is
"the
license is not GPL compatible".
</rant>
No, I don't mean "GPL compatible". I'd be perfectly happy for the DMD
backend to be released under a GPL-incompatible free/open source licence
like the CDDL.
The problem is not GPL compatibility but whether sufficient freedoms are
granted to distribute and modify sources.
And the only one such limitation of freedom which has ever been
identified, in numerous posts (hundreds!) on this topic, is that the
license is not GPL compatible and therefore cannot be distributed with
(say) OS distributions.
Everything else is FUD.
