xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: system call documentation [license question]

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: system call documentation [license question]
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:55:27 +0000
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, Andries.Brouwer@xxxxxx, kaos@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030202155017.GA13373@wotan.suse.de>; from ak@suse.de on Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 04:50:17PM +0100
References: <1044199525.1372.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0302021633280.1441-100000@muriel.parsec.at> <20030202155017.GA13373@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 04:50:17PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Another alternative would be the new FDL from the FSF
> (http://www.fsf.org/licenses/fdl.html)
> but it seems to be a bit too complicated for me.

At least the Debian folks considere this license non-free (and I fully
agree with tham, not that it matters..), so there's a singnificant
part of the Linux userbase that won't easily get them.

I'd be happy if we wouldn't get any FDL-pollution into linux-specific
packages..


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>