On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 08:57:04PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Sep 10, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Not "now". Debian (and I think every other distribution) has been > > > distributing software with this kind of licenses for years, without any > > > apparent ill effect on users. > > Not true. Many licenses that failed to comply with DFSG [0] has not been > > accepted. Many packages entered the Debian archive by incident has been > > removed. Past experience shows that licenses having choice of venue has > > been > > avoided [0][1]. > You show that the same 5-6 debian-legal@ contributors do not believe > that some licenses are free, but I do not see ftpmasters removing > from the archive packages with a choice of venue clause in their license > (I will not believe that they do not know about licenses like the MPL > and QPL).
Last time this came up about ocaml and the QPL, ocaml's upstream removed the choice-of-venue clause from the licence, under the menace of the package removal. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
