I don't mean to whine, but

[Marc Rauw]

David Johnson wrote:

> But, and this is a big but, why does every trivial variant of
> an existing license need discussion? A far better approach is to
> institutionalize license templates.

I agree; this surely would save everyone a lot of time and confusion.

>>
http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:4860:200202:pdjhhikmglggeanafjcc
>
> I definitely recall a discussion on this one. Am I mistaken?

Yes, you are. :)

At least, there hasn't been any discussion in this group (until the last
post of Matthew C. Weigel, that is); perhaps it was discussed in private.

Regards,
Marc Rauw

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3