Am Dienstag, den 14.02.2006, 20:29 +0100 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> Note: the CDDL clearly is a license that follows the rules from Debian.
See, that's exactly the point. I believe otherwise; so it isn't clear to
me, at least with a choice of venue.
> If you believe otherwise, tell me exactly _what_ you don't like and _why_ the
> CDDL is not following Debians rules.
Quite simple: I want to be able to set up a server, putting "main" into
sources.list and not having to wonder wether I just submitted myself
under the jurisdiction of Kiribati (taken from the member list of the
United Nations by pure coincidence). And this can happen if choice of
venue clauses are allowed in main.
And please stop telling me that I don't like the CDDL; this is not about
the CDDL which can be used without a choice of venue clause.
> Note-2: While the CDDL is OK, the current GPLv3 draft is definitely
> allowing discriminaton and for this reason not DSFG compliant.
In any case, this is totally unrelated to star, CDDL and choice of
venue. Who was the first one to use the word "FUD" in this discussion?
> Let us wait what whether Debian will accept a GPLv3 licensed project......
Why, do you plan to relicense star under GPLv3?
Regards
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
