Re: Clarification of WineX packaging request
Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net> writes:
> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 08:51:42PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net> writes:
> >
> > > We're talking about Transgaming's bogus pseudo-free license. What does that
> > > have to do with copy protection?
> >
> > Transgaming said that one reason they might "have to" change their
> > license if Debian actually does what it says we can do, is that they
> > are bound by obligations to third parties, including copy protection.
> > They were very vague about it.
>
> Doesn't make sense. If that is the case then why didn't they make their
> license different to begin with? Smells bad.
Their reason seems to be laziness. They found a license which is
more or less what they wanted, and they think that is somehow OK.
Possibly they are just insanely sloppy.
The more nefarious explanation is that they want to deliberately
mislead poeple about the status of the software. One reason might be
that sourceforge tolerates the current license, but not a more
restrictive one.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: