On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 04:25:35PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > > Whatever :) Even the Regents of the University of California have switched > > to the better version of the license, which only strenghtens the position of > > encouraging people to not use the advertising clause. The old version is > > history and it should stay there. > > The old version is definitely *not* history, it is still used by many > packages (the Regents' decision only affects stuff they hold copyright > on). I agree that it should not be recommended for new programs, but this > is not something that has changed, and the old version still is DFSG free.
But I was not changing the DFSG and its list of free licenses, just a page on www.debian.org explaining the licenses, presumably to someone who doesn't know. I don't see the need to explain an old license which shouldn't be used in any new programs. -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
