On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 11:36:36AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Richard Hartmann <richih.mailingl...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Something that _can_ easily be changed (afaik) is that the DFSG[1] > > states that > > > 'The GPL, BSD, and Artistic licenses are examples of licenses that > > we consider free.' > > > It's quite obvious that this refers to 2- and 3- clause BSD, not > > 4-clause BSD. > > It is? > > The 4-clause BSD license is also DFSG-free. We have a bunch of 4-clause > BSD licensed software in the archive.
The GPL incompatability might have tricked folks who aren't carefully reading into thinking it's not free. Either way, there's a more general point about DFSG 10, which has been brought up a few times (usually by folks who assume the DFSG is the letter of the law, whereas they're actually guidelines.) My 2c, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paul...@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
