On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 01:56:34PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > The most problematic part is that the license requires explicit > permission by the authors if modified versions should be distributed - > and it has to be modified slightly just to make it policy-compliant. > I have written e-mail to the author regarding this question (and not yet > gotten an answer). However, it is not clear to me how this permission > should look like and what rights it should include. I didn't find any > conclusive statements in the debian-legal archives, and I don't know > whether there are packages in non-free from which I could take a > wording. > I guess that permission to distribute would have to include permission > to distribute further modified versions, like security fixes, ASAP > without further contact to the authors. Permission for _anybody_ to > redistribute it is not necessary for non-free, right? Permission for others to distribute is not required, no. Permission to make security fixes is not required, either (we distribute some binary-only packages in non-free), though I don't imagine the Security Team will love you for adding more such packages to the archive. > But, most importantly, who is "The Debian Project", which would be > granted the permission, in this sense? Everybody who runs a server with > a *.debian.org DNS name? Or are there more complete mirrors than these? > Or are the administrators of mirrors not responsible at all, but only > ftp-master? To whom would a written letter have to be addressed? In effect, permission would have to be granted to our complete mirror network, which includes many sites not under the .debian.org domain, often run by people not directly affiliated with Debian. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpeVf9MAtkTI.pgp
Description: PGP signature