Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would say that any license that compels modifications to be under > anything other than a copyleft is problematic. Copyleft is only > allowed because it is explicitly grandfathered in by DFSG #10.
Oh, come on. Any argument that implies that we only consider the GPL free because we explicitly say it is is insane. Without considering the GPL free, we have nothing. Interpreting the DFSG in such a way that we can only ship a kernel and basic userland because the GPL is explicitly listed suggests that the interpretation is incorrect. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
