Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Les Mikesell]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 07:47:45AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:29:26PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>>> In general the terms I'm speaking of are more permissive than the GPL 
>>>>  and the GPL is the one that was intentionally incompatible, but 
>>>> that's  not the point.  The point is that the work-as-a-whole clause 
>>>> is an  immoral restriction.
>>> Don't include GPL'ed software, then.
>> OK, but how is the useful to anyone?
> 
> It is useful to hundreds of thousands of developers of software under
> compatible licenses who do include it, so I reject your premise that
> it isn't useful to anyone.

I didn't mean no GPL-encumbered code could be useful at all. I meant 
"how is your demand to not include any GPL'd software when sharing useful?".

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com