On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 03:30:13PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 08:19:19AM -0400, Joe Moore wrote: > > That certainly makes the QPL more attractive to me, as a > > non-original-author. But I'm afraid I don't understand why any original > > author would use it. > > Indeed, so by arguing that way, we could bring this clause to be modified by > the upstream author, could we not ?
You think that taking the concerns of debian-legal to OCaml upstream would cause you to lose credibility with them, but tricking them into changing the licence by saying the licence means something that it doesn't wouldn't lose you any credibility? - Matt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
