On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > inode0 wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore >>>> it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL >>> >>> Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the >>> GPL. >> >> For a list of dozens of examples showing this statement to be utterly >> wrong see >> >> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLCompatibleLicenses > > The statement is not wrong - the reason a few that are listed as compatible > is that the permit themselves to be replaced by the GPL. When combined in a > work with GPL components any other attributes of the original licenses no > longer apply. This is amazing logic. If a few *dozen* examples contradicting your claim that everything that is not the GPL is incompatible with the GPL doesn't convince you then nothing can. You seem to really have a beef with copyleft and that is fine. Some people value freedom for developers more than freedom for users. And they tend to use licenses that grant as much freedom to developers as they desire. Others prefer to assure freedom for users and they tend to favor copyleft licenses like the GPL. It is an honest difference of opinion but there really isn't anything furthered by misrepresenting what the other side stands for. John -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
