Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You seem to be missinformed: When cdrtools have been 100% GPL, it was
> > attacked
> > by Debian _because_ it was 100% GPL and because the GPL is a frequently
> > missinterpreted license.
> >
> > ...so I decided to choose a less problematic license than the GPL.
>
> The GPL is designed to restrict distribution of combinations of things
> that are not all-GPL if any component is GPL. So any other license is
> equally problematic as long as GPL components might exist. The 'less
> problematic' solution is dual licensing like perl uses unless you want
> to apply restrictions one way or the other.
I was attacked by Debian _for_ using the GPL and it seems that you did not help
at that time. I will not use a license again after I was attacked _because_ I
used this specific license.
The GPL is discouraged by Debian...
You should think aboiut why you did not help to defend the GPL in 2005.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
