<?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:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ccRdf 0.3.0 Available</title>
	<atom:link href="http://yergler.net/blog/2003/12/05/ccrdf-030-available/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://yergler.net/blog/2003/12/05/ccrdf-030-available/</link>
	<description>Because eventually I&#039;ll be right. Theoretically.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:14:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morten W. Petersen</title>
		<link>http://yergler.net/blog/2003/12/05/ccrdf-030-available/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Morten W. Petersen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yergler.net/blog/archives/2003/12/05/ccrdf-030-available#comment-9</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s ironic that code for ccRdf is released under a rather non-flexible license like the GPL..

I&#039;d like to include this in a CC related project we&#039;re doing, but can&#039;t as a result of the license. Would you consider changing it to a more flexible license, for example BSD, LGPL or the CC by?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s ironic that code for ccRdf is released under a rather non-flexible license like the GPL..</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to include this in a CC related project we&#8217;re doing, but can&#8217;t as a result of the license. Would you consider changing it to a more flexible license, for example BSD, LGPL or the CC by?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

