At 09.19 -0500 01.14.2001, Ben Tilly wrote: >That situation definitely had ActiveState violating the >spirit of the Artistic License, whether or not they were >violating the letter. They violated neither the spirit nor the letter. -- Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pudge.net/ Open Source Development Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://osdn.com/
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-only (w... Chris Nandor
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-onl... Nathan Torkington
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL... Chris Nandor
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to b... Nathan Torkington
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL... Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-onl... Russ Allbery
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL... Chris Nandor
- Re: no one is asking for Perl to b... Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: no one is asking for Perl ... Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Ben Tilly
- Re: licensing issues Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Simon Cozens
- Re: licensing issues Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Simon Cozens
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Dave Rolsky
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: licensing issues Russ Allbery
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Chris Nandor
