Sean Kellogg said on Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 09:55:55PM -0700,:
> I don't believe the MPL was ever meant to be a free license,just an open > one, > hence the requests and eventual agreement to release it under the We had discussed the *Nokia* Public licnese earlier, found that it identical in certain respects to the MPL http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/08/msg01842.html , Concluded that the Nokia Public is not DFSG compliant, See (among others) http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/08/msg01826.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/08/msg01808.html (and there are others too). And decided that we can continue with Mozilla coz. it is dual licensed under GPL/LGPL. > Oh, wouldn't life be easy if everyone would just use the GPL or BSD license > and all these variations would just disappear. Freedom comes at a price!!! -- Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.port5.com ~/\$ mv -vfi linux gnu/linux
