MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-07-11 10:59:22 +0100 Mahesh T. Pai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> it cannot be >> in main, will some situation arise where application X, also solely >> under QPL can be in main? > > No, but it would be possible that QPL-like +extras could be. Having a > checklist QPL=>non-free decision isn't as helpful as we could be. Worked > examples are a far better explanation.
This is the reason why in my summary I used the phrasing "software licensed solely under this license is not Free Software". Any arbitrary license can be made free or non-free given sufficient changes/clarifications/extras. However, I think that any arbitrary program under _only_ the _unmodified_ QPL cannot possibly be Free Software. - Josh Triplett
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
