Re: w3m: 'license'; error: redefinition of 'struct file_handle'

[Mark H Weaver]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> I asked RMS, and he thinks that this clause is okay because it says a
>> "distribution fee" is okay and does not limit the amount.  Thus, what it
>> prohibits is a fee for the right to use the program, which is okay.
>
> Great, thanks for investigating.
>
>> Apologies for paraphrasing RMS rather than quoting him directly, but I
>> forgot to ask whether it was okay to publish what he wrote in private
>> email.
>
> In the future I think it’s better if we work with the gnu-linux-libre
> list, where there are knowledgeable people lurking (from gNewSense,
> Trisquel, etc.), as it would allow us to share efforts with them (and
> vice versa ;-)).

I did not intend to preempt that suggestion, but rather to augment it.
I wanted to know RMS's opinion, but I want to hear the opinions of other
knowledgeable people as well.  Any volunteers to raise this question on
the gnu-linux-libre list?

Still, until we hear otherwise, I think we can tentatively assume that
the license is okay, and proceed with the w3m packaging.

      Mark