On Sun, 30 Sep 2001, Martin Konold wrote: > According to RMS the only way to become free software aka "GPL compatible" > is either to have it GPL licensed or allow for conversion/relicensing to > GPL.
This is factually incorrect. RMS does not require free software to be GPL compatible. As he frequently says, it is his opinion that being GPL compatible should be a goal of free software license writers because of the wealth of software under the GPL (a situation he worked hard to engineer, granted). If you were to look at the FSF web page on the topic, you'd see "GPL-Compatible Free Softare Licenses" and "GPL-Incompatible Free Software Licenses." -- Matthew Weigel Research Systems Programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] ne [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
