On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 21:27 +0000, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 20:15:35 schrieb Esben Stien:
> > But that's really the funny thing here. Your software isn't from the
> > free/open source software communities. It doesn't conform to neither
> > the free software definition nor the open source definition.
>
> Wrong: http://linuxsampler.org/faq.html#open_source
>
> Btw, only LS (the engine) has that commercial exception. There's however still
> other software components hosted by the project which are all distributed
> under "true" / pure (L)GPL. And after all, most of us contributed to various
> other open source projects as well, so your statement is really wrong.
The one that points directly to the OSI definition in the first
sentence, and says "If the latter is denied the license is categorized
as a shared source license." you mean?
-DR-
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sat Jan 26 04:15:02 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jan 26 2008 - 04:15:02 EET