Subject: Re: "Community Source License" vs. "Public License"
From: Brian Behlendorf <>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 19:30:24 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "DJ" == DJ Delorie <> writes:
>     >> GNU started the tradition of naming a free software license
>     >> "Foo Public License".
>     DJ> But the FSF uses the GNU *General* public license.  The trend
>     DJ> should have been "Foo General Public License" or "Foo GPL".
> My interpretation of that has always been "public" means the license
> is available to any member of the public, and "general" means "this is 
> the last Public License that you'll ever need."  I guess you could
> always reassociate as "((General Public) License)" but that's sort of
> redundant.

I would never advocate that Apache call its license the "Apache GPL",
because like it nor not, the common reference to the FSF license is as
"the GPL", e.g. "GPL-licensed", etc.  Whether it means "GNU Public
License" or "General Public License" is immaterial.