|
From: | Etienne M. Gagnon |
Subject: | Re: Simple Proposal |
Date: | Thu, 08 Nov 2001 11:42:29 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011023 |
Chris Gray wrote:
Does "everybody" have to include RMS, and does http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html represent his current position?
I can't speak for RMS, but he already agree to the CURRENT Classpath GNU+exc license, which is much weaker than the LGPL. So, apparently, he agrees that the non-AWT code falls into the category that does not require full "pure GPL" protection.
Of course, my proposal is for the non-AWT code. I do not want to do the battle for the AWT license (others can do it;-).
Etienne -- Etienne M. Gagnon http://www.info.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |