Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
License question - QPL vs. SCM
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@y...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] License question - QPL vs. SCM
Hi,

> My opinion is probably biased though.  I've always thought QPL was a silly 
> license.  The whole idea that you can release source + patches but not the 
> patched sources seems absurd to me.  There is no difference between the two. 

It's not silly if you intend to make clear what comes from upstream
and what has been modified.  Debian packages are organised like this:
unmodified upstream tarball + Debian patches.  In a different domain,
the American constitution works the same way: there's the original
text + patches (that go by the name "amendments").

Cheers,
Dario



      ___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference  

http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/