Branden Robinson writes: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 06:19:38PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote: > > Unfortunately "seems to me" is almost the only kind of comment that we get, > > it would be more helpful if anyone could give a more objective criterion > > that shows how LPPL breaks some clause of the DFSG, however not this > > example. > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00035.html
already answered that it was an oversight to leave that in the draft > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00036.html already responded to half of it (in one or two cases asking for clarification if i remember) > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00071.html that's one of yours right? it does discuss general stuff and not explicit points about the license draft or where there is explicit an explicit problem. ie it is another one of those examples of general type. and as far as the general stuff about freedom for ... etc goes it was answered very explicitly by David, wasn't it? so in other words the above are either no explicit criterion (for which David asked) or they have been answered or mended. anyway a) I think i have identified a number of concerns as well as other problems which I would like to address with a proposal and/or comments b) I'm dead tired tonight so i'm not going to do that ... perhaps giving some thinking space might now be that wrong anyway frank -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
