Re: Source only opensource licence.

2003-12-02 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mar 02/12/2003 à 00:18, Franck a écrit : >The licence would not be so bad. The only restriction is about the > redistribution of binaries wich would be restricted. Windows binaries > distribution would be forbidden, but GNU/Linux (as well as GNU Hurd and > BSDs) binary distribution would be

Re: Source only opensource licence.

2003-12-02 Thread Måns Rullgård
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>The licence would not be so bad. The only restriction is about the >> redistribution of binaries wich would be restricted. Windows binaries >> distribution would be forbidden, but GNU/Linux (as well as GNU Hurd and >> BSDs) binary distribution wo

Re: Source only opensource licence.

2003-12-02 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit "Franck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >The licence would not be so bad. The only restriction is about the > redistribution of binaries wich would be restricted. Windows binaries > distribution would be forbidden, I think such a restriction is inherently incompatible with DFSG-freedom. > >Fr

Re: Source only opensource licence.

2003-12-02 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 02 Dec 2003, Franck wrote: > The licence would not be so bad. The only restriction is about the > redistribution of binaries wich would be restricted. Windows binaries > distribution would be forbidden, but GNU/Linux (as well as GNU Hurd > and BSDs) binary distribution would be okay without