On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 10:20:29PM -0700, Colin Mattson wrote: > > I have to take that back... http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/ > has the full text of the license. Section 1.4 is somewhat troublesome when > combined with sections 2.1 and 2.2 (specifically 2.2(c)). > For "personal use," (as well as research and development) you are free to keep > your changes private. However, as soon as you become an organizational > entity not only doing R&D on the product, you must distribute your source > code in full. > > Thus, the APSL distinguishes (and discriminates) between corporations and > single users, thus violating the Debian Free Software Guidelines provision > for non-discriminatory licensing. > > In that case, it would indeed be classified non-free. thanks for your looking at this and clearly explaining it. now, who should get the bug for getting qtss moved into non-free where it belongs? qtss or ftp.debian.org? -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgpCUO06tL0PX.pgp
Description: PGP signature