Typo, please read
Hello,
This is a small follow up to fix typing error and clarify a thing.
> So, just because people wrote immutable standard documents in the past, this
> is not a reason to encourage a free+acceptable restrictions license in the
> future.
I meant: "..., this is not a reason *not* to encourage a..."
> > We should not flip-flop from a high moral ground and accept
> > anything pragmatism based on what document we look at.
>
> I see the "verbatim" section as a pragmatism.
Reading it again, I think I didn't understand what you wrote in the first
place. Would you mind to rephrase it? Especially I don't know if the second
part of the sentence still belongs to "We should not", or if this is
something "we should".
Thank you,
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: