Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Both. They *are* lousy licenses to endorse, and some people *do* try > to use it as a trump card to defeat rational analysis of these > licenses. Realistically, even if everybody at the time thought they > were free according to the DFSG, they might have been *wrong*. Eris > knows it happens often enough; accurate license analysis takes > discussion on the order of *years*. It only takes one small bug to > make a license non-free, and the law is unforgiving of bugs.
Oh, come off it. Everyone knew what the bugs with 4-clause BSD were in '97, and I find it hard to believe that people thought the Artistic license was anything other than a confusing mess even then. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
