Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:43:00 +0200
From: Sven LUTHER <luther@maxime.u-strasbg.fr>
To: Dave Berry <daveb@harlequin.co.uk>, Pierre Weis <Pierre.Weis@inria.fr>,
Subject: Re: licence issues
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990420102452.009b5ec0@mailhost.ed.harlequin.co.uk>; from Dave Berry on Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 10:24:52AM +0100
On Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 10:24:52AM +0100, Dave Berry wrote:
> At 19:53 19/04/99 +0200, Pierre Weis wrote:
> >You are right, but you know, nowadays, it's a kind of a religious war:
> >you must have been baptized under the GPL to be declared a ``free''
> >man (sorry, I meant software).
>
> I find the most useful definition is not "free software", but "Open Source
> software". This has a broader definition than just GNU. If you look at
which is just the debian free software guidelines (DFSG) from where it
originated, look also at :
http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
(Another case where proper credit is not always given to the right persons ...)
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:22 MET