At 0:59 -0500 2001.01.09, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>Chris Nandor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> True, unless we stick to the same licensing scheme we have today for perl,
>> which, like it or not, has served Perl very, very well.
>As it turns out, this isn't an RFC under consideration by Larry, AFAIK.
>The only RFC about licensing that went in was (Artistic-2.0|GPL).

Right.  Not many RFCs said "don't change anything."  That doesn't mean
anything, though.

Chris Nandor                      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Open Source Development Network    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to