Thu, 30 May 2002 14:58:07 -0700
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 21:10:21 -0000
From: "Marc Santoro" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Ultimately whether the LLGPL does what it's supposed to
> will be up to a judge. I sure hope it never comes to that.
Nor do I. However, as it stands, the LLGPL is awfully ambiguous. Maybe it's
time for a serious revision.
You mentioned also going to Stallman with suggestions for
revisions. And now you're approaching us. What it is precisely
that you are trying to accomplish? A little background on what
your goals are and what you are trying to do will help us to
determine how to respond to your issues.
For example, looking at your email, and looking at the tunes.org site,
it is obvious that this project is firmly entrenched in the LPGL.
1. Protecting the LPGL from what you consider a threat to its
2. Considering using LLPGL as an alternative form of licensing, based
on the metaprogramming issues you are surely facing?
3. ... ?
Duane Rettig Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/ (www)
1995 University Ave Suite 275 Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone: (510) 548-3600; FAX: (510) 548-8253 duane@Franz.COM (internet)