On 2004-07-14 02:17:37 +0100 Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
Having a fairly short summary that references another one doesn't
seem
like a bad thing. Hopefully they'll be common.
That's exactly what I had in mind; a license summary, and if necesary,
package summaries that reference the relevant license summary and add
anything specific to the given package.
Why is range[2,n+1] analyses better than range[1,n]?
How can this list can analyse a licence without inventing a
hypothetical package, when the DFSG are for software and not licences?
It seemed pretty clear that you were working for libcwd for the recent
QPL draft summary.
If hypothetical packages are always needed, why not replace with real
ones when we can?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
"Matthew Garrett is quite the good sort of fellow, despite what
my liver is sure to say about him in [...] 40 years" -- branden
