On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:44:19PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > * Personally I'm an AGPLv3 proponent. The system ought to be suitable > for AGPLv3 provided that its submodules are AGPLv3-compatible (and > if they aren't, then we can probably write a licence exception). > (The main program I'm thinking of here is a Ruby on Rails > application.) What are people's feelings about AGPLv3 ?
I am fine with the stated purpose of the AGPLv3, however I do not think the actual implementation is compatible with free software. There have been no official clarification how the AGPLv3 is supposed to work in a lot of situation and how it is compatible with the plain reading of the license. Without them, I am wary of declaring the AGPL a free software license. There is a world of difference between the actual text of the AGPLv3 and how it is advertised. But it is probably not the right venue to discuss the AGPLv3. Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131212172049.GA10425@yellowpig
