Re: License for the Torque Resource Manager (RFC)
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 05:14:36PM +0100, Roberto Gordo Saez wrote:
> > > | 5. Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on how to
> > > | obtain complete source code for the OpenPBS software and any
> > > | modifications and/or additions to the OpenPBS software. The source code
> > > | must either be included in the distribution or be available for no more
> > > | than the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and all modifications
> > > | and additions to the Software must be freely redistributable by any party
> > > | (including Licensor) without restriction.
> >
> > And it requires a more free license for derivative works than it
> > provides for the original work. That is non-free.
>
> This is an interesting point, i haven't noticed it until now. However,
> i don't understand why it is a problem. The NPL has a similar clause and
> it is considered free (but not recommended) by the FSF:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
I'm replying to myself. I've read the thread pointed by MJ Ray, with
more information on this subject. I was not aware of such discussion. I
should search for openpbs instead of torque in debian-legal ;-)
--
Roberto Gordo Saez - Free Software Engineer
Linalco "Especialistas en Linux y Software Libre"
http://www.linalco.com/ Tel: +34-914561700
Reply to: