On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 07:59:26PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: > Alexander Sack wrote: > > You still fail to give reasons why MPL is non-free. I don't see that. > > > > Yes, its not gpl-compatible, but again, that is not the same as non-free. > > debian-legal has some problems with the license, it is not clearly > stated that it is 100% DFSG-compliant, therefore, if it is not 100% it > remains non-free (to my understanding; affects joice-of-venue and patent > clause mainly). > > As least to my knowledge, there were no 'official' statement about > results of the investigations MJR did. So there is no (not yet?) final > decision. >
OK, I confirmed this. You were right: MPL is non-free. Anyway, because of mozillas attitude to migrate their whole code-base to become triple-licensed, we have an exception of the rule here. So, this bug is wontfix for IMHO .... but I leave tagging to the maintainer. -- GPG messages preferred. | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** Alexander Sack | : :' : The universal [EMAIL PROTECTED] | `. `' Operating System http://www.asoftsite.org | `- http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
