<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TCLP 2009-12-20 News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thecommandline.net/2009/12/20/news_201/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thecommandline.net/2009/12/20/news_201/</link>
	<description>Podcast and blog exploring digital citizenry as a creator and a consumer.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 03:51:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randal L. Schwartz</title>
		<link>http://thecommandline.net/2009/12/20/news_201/comment-page-1/#comment-3411</link>
		<dc:creator>Randal L. Schwartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecommandline.net/?p=2090#comment-3411</guid>
		<description>Thanks for bringing the badging FSFE post to my awareness.  I noted on their blog that they got Perl&#039;s Artistic License backwards, lumping it in with &quot;Author retains rights that no contributor can have&quot; licenses like the GPL, rather than &quot;Author gives all his rights to any willing contributor&quot; licenses like the BSD/MIT/Apache family. While there are a few minor restrictions in the Artistic License (namely, that you cannot modify a distribution without making it clear that you are distributing a modified copy), it&#039;s very close to the BSD license.  Hopefully, they&#039;ll correct alignment before you read this. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for bringing the badging FSFE post to my awareness.  I noted on their blog that they got Perl&#8217;s Artistic License backwards, lumping it in with &#8220;Author retains rights that no contributor can have&#8221; licenses like the GPL, rather than &#8220;Author gives all his rights to any willing contributor&#8221; licenses like the BSD/MIT/Apache family. While there are a few minor restrictions in the Artistic License (namely, that you cannot modify a distribution without making it clear that you are distributing a modified copy), it&#8217;s very close to the BSD license.  Hopefully, they&#8217;ll correct alignment before you read this. <img src='http://thecommandline.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

