Python 2 for Debian?

[Warren Postma]

Quoth Thomas:
> But who's doing the pussyfooting ? RMS ? Debian ? CNRI ? Each one is doing
> what they think is best. Note that the licence talks are still ongoing,
and
> a GPL-compatible 1.6.1 was released not a few days ago. Python 2.0 is
> derived from 1.6 though, not 1.6.1, and also contains some BeOpen (and for
> 2.1, possibly some DC) specific stuff, so it requires some extra
attention.
> But there is still hope :)


All this "license compatibility" BS boils down to this: Until someone sues
somebody, this is all theoretical. Thus,  I stand by what I said earlier;
it's all just so much pussyfooting around, about nothing.

Where is the legal precedent? Until then, it's all speculation.  If I break
the GPL what happens? NOTHING.  Somebody sue me for a GPL violation, PLEASE.
<grin>

License writers are writing Pseudo Code for a problem domain in which the
compiler is not yet written. Are there any syntax errors in the GPL? Sorry,
we just don't know.

So why be picky about pseudo-code?

Wisely, the larger Python user community, and the larger Free Software
movement, ignores RMS, and everybody else, who opines endlessly on License
Compatibility Issues.

Licensing? Bah!


Warren