Re: It's now DFSG compliant? I think yes but...
On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Martin Schulze wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 1998 at 05:25:16PM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > -----Forwarded message from Norman Ramsey <email@example.com>-----
> > Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 14:09:08 -0500
> > From: Norman Ramsey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > I have modified the noweb license to address your two ojections.
> > Let me know if this will do the job.
> > Noweb is copyright 1989-1998 by Norman Ramsey. All rights reserved.
> > Noweb is protected by copyright. It is not public-domain
> > software or shareware, and it is not protected by a ``copyleft''
> > agreement like the one used by the Free Software Foundation.
> > Noweb is available free for any use in any field of endeavor. You may
> > redistribute noweb in whole or in part provided you acknowledge its
> > source and include this COPYRIGHT file. You may modify noweb and
> > create derived works, provided you retain this copyright notice, but
> > the result may not be called noweb without my written consent.
> This makes it imposssible for us to distributed a patched version
> of noweb. Non-DFSG afaik.
No, it forces us to rename it. Not non-DSFG, just borderline. Perhaps
encouraging him to modify the terms to simply require prominant notice
that is is a changed version....
Scott K. Ellis <email@example.com> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .