On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 5:02 PM Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Almost all copyleft licenses are *compatible with each other* for
> aggregations ("collective works") because of OSD #1 ("the license shall not
> restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component
> of an aggregate s
Lawrence,
please stop promoting your agenda under a (very) thin cover
of discussing licences. You’re annoying, in larger doses.
Sorry, but this had to be said.
>This entirely compatible commons includes software under the MPL,
>Eclipse PL, LGPL, and OSL 3.0 licenses.
Perhaps, but, other than th
[In response to Kevin, I have changed the subject.]
I appreciate learning John Cowan's opinion about the "commons" that is/are
created by open source licenses, but I wish to differ from his conclusions.
Almost all copyleft licenses are compatible with each other for aggregations
("collect
