Talk:Artistic License

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

[edit] Free Software vs. Open Source

The Artistic License is not considered a Free Software license by FSF [1], although the derived Python license is free software. It's a recognized Open Source license. --suruena 17:53, 2005 Apr 11 (UTC)

[edit] Will perl6 be artistic-2.0?

As far as I can tell, Perl 6 will be released under the GPL and the Artistic 2.0, but can someone confirm? Here's the artistic 2.0 with Rfc commentary: http://dev.perl.org/perl6/rfc/346.html Thanks. Gronky 14:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[2] Is giving me that impression. ―Linux|erist 16:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Um... yeah but what are the implications of software relased under AL?

This article tells me that there exists an AL and that most perl software is dual licensed under AL and GPL, and that there is some controversey about whether or not AL is OpenSource, but it doesn't tell me much about the license, what are its limitations or advantages, and what was Larry's intent in writing it? --203.6.205.131 01:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Talk%7EArtistic_License_648d.html"