> ps: i have not modified the wp article yet as of awaiting the outcome of
> this thread, but describing core force as Free software is definitely
> wrong (contradicting the preconditions of freedom #1)
lman/listinfo/discussion
FSF considers Apache License 2.0 a Free Software License.
I consider that Apache license (and others), can be used in Free Software. But
due too it's weaknesses, using Apache License to license the software, isn't by
itself enough to consider the software under that license to be Free Software.
Maybe FSF sees it also this way, but calls it a Free Software licence, to
simplify. Does anyone from FSF wants to comment this? Is this it?
I belive that althoug not intentional this is misleading. Maybe FSF should say
that Apache License (and other similar in that terms), maybe used to license
software copyrights, of Free Software, but isn't enough to consider it Free
Software.
«Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute,
study, change and improve the software.»
So maybe Free Software isn't just about copyright licensing, but also about
author practices that may actually grant that freedom.
with my cumpliments
Diogo Santos
--