Le dimanche 08 mai 2011 à 15:18 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : > On Sat, 07 May 2011 23:38:38 +0200 Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > > > Le samedi 07 mai 2011 à 23:20 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : > > > since I don't think CeCILL-C meets the DFSG: > > A bit out of topic but you are probably wrong here. All CeCILL licenses > > are DFSG compliant. > > Where may I find a detailed analysis that explains how the CeCILL-C > license meets the DFSG? > > I am only aware of the following analysis: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/01/msg00171.html > Please note that I have already cited this analysis, see > http://bugs.debian.org/618696#41 > > The analysis by Joe Smith highlights the GPL-incompatibility CeCILL-C is equivalent to the LGPL, not GPL. CeCILL is GPL compabible. It has been designed with the FSF to be fully compatible with the LGPL. It is why I stated that the CeCILL-C is DFSG. After that, I apologize if it has been considered as not DFSG on debian-legal mailing list. I wasn't aware of that.
Sylvestre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
