At Wed, 11 Feb 2004 2:31pm +0200, Luchezar Georgiev wrote: > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:48:57 +0100, Aitor Santamari'a Merino wrote: > > > I am for that, because this way we can get rid of at all of these > > issues about linking, stubbing to non GPL or composing software using > > tools that are not GPL. However, I have not read in depth all these > > licenses that you mention, where to start with? > > I found this page convenient as a starting point: > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > > > Also how many other people here share this point? > > I don't know. People, please express your opinion! > > Lucho
I'll admit I don't really care for the GPL much myself. I use it because it's well-known and gets more support than using an alternative. Me, I would just take the BSD license and add a clause requiring that sources be provided (a la GPL), so a short and simple license with the same idea as the GPL, but that's easier to understand and less manifesto-like in nature. -uso. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
