[self-followup]

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 06:09:08PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> It is, however, worth noting that many subtle variations of the MIT/X11
> license exist.  That the traditional MIT/X11 license is (by
> general consensus, I daresay) DFSG-free, that any license derived from it
> is also DFSG-free.

There are some missing words in the above.  Here's what I meant to say:

That the traditional MIT/X11 license is (by general consensus, I daresay)
DFSG-free, does not mean that any license derived from it is also DFSG-free.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |     There's something wrong if you're
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     always right.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                 |     -- Glasow's Law
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to