Questions / Concepts GPL. Was: Re: GPL License with clause for Web use?

MJ Ray mjr at
Fri Nov 23 10:10:46 UTC 2007

simo <simo.sorce at> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 19:01 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I'm surprised that a member of a GPL drafting committees[*] was not
> > told where the AGPL is currently causing problems when being asked to
> > review a GPL that adds compatibility with it.  Weren't the committees
> > given briefings on the current use of these licences?  Didn't they ask?
> I said that *I* didn't pay much attention to it. Your implications about
> a faulty drafting process are mere speculation in bad faith.

If FSF didn't brief the GPL drafting committees, then it'd make me
wonder why they were kept in the dark about this major change to GPL.
If they did and you just ignored it, fair enough.  I don't know what
happened, so I asked questions.  I don't mean implications, I mean
questions.  I'm disappointed if you won't answer.

Nevertheless, if you didn't pay much attention to it, then you should
not suggest that we're over-estimating "how much probable it is for an
AGPL project to be successful".  Don't claim AGPL is an irrelevance if
you actually have no idea of its current scale, let alone the
problem's probable future scale after this latest fanfare from FSF.

Hope that explains,
MJ Ray tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke

More information about the Discussion mailing list