> I don't understand what you're questioning here. > Could you please > rephrase or elaborate? I do not understand here, why some licenses are compatible and which ones are not. For instance, the Mozilla Public License is incompatible with the GPL and we can see Mozilla firefox and/or Seamonkey, Thunderbird, .., etc live nicely in several distributions http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses and it is a non compatible license with the GPL. Also a project that was licensed under the GPL, made changes to another license the CDDL, and I wondered why, GPL does not allow those kind of things? It happened. What was wrong with the change? I found the answer here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html > > > I am not an enemy of the GPL, I only question why it > tries to > > restrict things that are not licensed within itself? > > If you can read Portuguese (from your name, perhaps you > can), please > have a look at > http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/pub/gplv3-novidades > and http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/pub/copyleft, it may > help > understand the reasoning behind the conditions of the GPL, > if its > preamble doesn't for you. > > > The people should decide in the end what they want to > call it, is that fair? > > That people can and should decide it, sure, by all means. > Whether or > not it's fair, that depends on how they decide. > It's between them and > their conscience. > > -- This last sentence is fair and sincere. Thank you for that. Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
