Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-only (was Re: licensing issues)

At 17.19 -0500 01.14.2001, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>The FSF surely wants Perl to be under a GPL compatible license (and,
>(GPL|SOMETHING) is always GPL-compatible, by default).  I don't think
>the FSF has ever expressed a desire that Perl be GPL-only.  In fact, the
>FSF has a policy of encouraging everyone to always dual-licensing
>(GPL|Artistic) for Perl modules, to encourage uniformity, and avoid
>licensing confusion for those who use lots of Perl modules.

I think it is for compatiblity, not uniformity (perhaps you are using them
somewhat synonymously).


>(Indeed, it is quite unfortunate that there are so many modules on CPAN
>that have chosen Artistic-only or GPL-only.)

I think it is unfortunate that anyone would think someone else's choice of
license is unfortunate.  :)

-- 
Chris Nandor                      [email protected]    http://pudge.net/
Open Source Development Network    [email protected]     http://osdn.com/