"Chris Travers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] I am right that Debian considers the GPL v3 to be a license whose > use allows but does not ensure that the software meets the DFSG?
That's my understanding of it. > Wouldn't > the GPL v3 make our job in complying with these guidelines harder because we > would have to review optional terms of all dependencies under the GPL v3? Yes. We also get to watch the early adopters for problems, like we did with the FDL. > Is that a good use of core time? There are thus compelling reasons *not* to > upgrade the license. I just don't want to be forced to do so. Time to make sure developers are talking to upstream developers! Best wishes, -- MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op. Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
