Re: Simple Proposal

[Etienne M. Gagnon]

Chris Gray wrote:

> Does "everybody" have to include RMS, and does
>   http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
> represent his current position?


I can't speak for RMS, but he already agree to the CURRENT Classpath GNU+exc 
license, which is much weaker than the LGPL.  So, apparently, he agrees that the 
 non-AWT code falls into the category that does not require full "pure GPL" 
protection.

Of course, my proposal is for the non-AWT code.  I do not want to do the battle 
for the AWT license (others can do it;-).

Etienne
--
Etienne M. Gagnon                    http://www.info.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM:                                       http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC:                                       http://www.sablecc.org/