Re: [Q] Packaging issues with shareware
Sudhakar Chandrasekharan <thaths@netscape.com> wrote:
> 1. The upstream developer says "I realize that most people won't pay.
> That's not a problem for me. If I had to do it all over, I would
> probably have kept it as freeware but I would feel bad changing back
> to freeware at this point since the people that sent me money might
> feel ripped off."
Implying that it's not usual for a software producer to drop prices?
You might suggest to the author that the license be made free, and
that shareware customers are entitled to some level of support.
> 2. Which section would linklint go into? contrib? non-free?
Non-free, if anywhere.
> 3. Linklint, currently, does not come with a copyright notice. However
> it coms with ordering information. Could the ordering information
> substitute for the copyright?
No, because that doesn't give us the right to distribute it. The
statement by the author that it's shareware, and that the author
doesn't expect most people to pay for it might be considered a license,
but it would be better for the author to supply distribution terms.
--
Raul
Reply to: