Scripsit Joerg Wendland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sure, but I did not say "recommend a license" but having a license that > does not only fit the DFSG but reflects the DFSG and Debian's sense of > free software in general.
I think it would be stretching the truth to say that Debian, as a project, has any "sense of free software in general" that could back such kind of official approval. We can usually agree about whether a given license is free or not. But there is nothing like consensus about which of the many ways to construct a free license is the "best". We have valued and well-spoken contributors on debian-legal who personally think that a license ought to be viral, forcing freedom on derived works. We have other valued and well-spoken contributors on debian-legal who personally think that a license is "more free" if it allows derived works to be less free. Usually our consensus does its best to respect both points of view, but that would be impossible if we were to single out a particular license as the ideal one. > If I wrote software and put it under that license I could be certain > that my software could be included in main without having to worry > about OpenSSL and such... It is impossible to construct a single license that can be guaranteed to allows unlimited linking to each and every library in Debian. (This is because two such libraries, while individually free, may have mutually incompatible licenses that prevent both from being included in the same derived work). -- Henning Makholm "Nemo enim fere saltat sobrius, nisi forte insanit."
