Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:43:00 +0200
From: Sven LUTHER <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Dave Berry <email@example.com>, Pierre Weis <Pierre.Weis@inria.fr>,
Subject: Re: licence issues
In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; 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 :
(Another case where proper credit is not always given to the right persons ...)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:22 MET