Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello *, > > Since I have read tonns of different licences I do not realy know > what to do. Since I am using Debian/main only (with the exception > of libdvdcss2) since more then 7 years now I want to say, that my > Software any Licence which comply with the DFSG. > > Question: > > Is there allready a licence which use the term DFSG as licence? > > I do not fully agree with the FSF and the GPL. v2.0 maybe ok, > but I have complains against the new one.
If you do not like gpl3, use gpl2 without the "or later" option, if that does what you want. The FSF won't like you if you do, but nobody is under any obligation to please them. Personally, I'm allergic to more than two paragraphs of legalese, and I don't want to release my work under terms I do not fully understand, so I release my stuff under the MIT license. It gives a little more permission than the GPL, but I don't really care if someone uses my code in a commercial application. It doesn't interfere with my reasons for releasing it in the first place, and it lets any free software project use it, without any concerns about being "GPL compatible". All the fuss about open source licenses being incompatible is, IMHO, contradictory to the spirit of free software, and spending time on such issues is counter-productive. -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
