On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 10:06:31PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > Hi, > > though LGPL is quite OLD, AFAICS there is no summary. To put it on the > web pages, I wrote one: > > Debian-legal has concluded that the LGPL (Library Gnu Public License) > v2 and LGPL (Lesser Gnu Public License) v2.1 is a DFSG-free license. > > The licenses are included on every debian system in > /usr/share/common-licenses, so I ommited the full reference
I think your intentions are noble, but I don't think we should do this. Not because the LGPL doesn't deserve a summary, but because it hasn't been done right. The entire license needs to be posted and carefully scrutinized. I would suggest that we postpone such an exercise until after the GNU FDL situation is resolved. Furthermore, it might be wise if we only attempt to adjudicate licenses that are brought to us for consideration. I'm not sure we should go on hunts for licenses to audit ourselves; to do so might damage the impression of impartiality that we should attempt to cultivate and live up to. -- G. Branden Robinson | I am only good at complaining. Debian GNU/Linux | You don't want me near your code. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Dan Jacobson http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
