"Noah Slater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I do not think this thread is an embarrassment to the community. I > think it speaks volumes about people's commitment to free software. > > While we can applaud such contributions it is no excuse to waiver on > one's ethics and principles.
Yes, this was also my motivation for discussing it here. > Regardless of content, or even format, if the Python Papers are not > free as per the FSF's definition they are encumbered. > > I am hoping that the author/publishers will reconsider the choice of > licencing. I also hope that a free license can be chosen. In the meantime though, I'm very happy that (as announced in a new thread) the existing license terms are no longer being falsely described as free. -- \ "If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let | `\ 'em go, because, man, they're gone." -- Jack Handey | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
