[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Package Moscow ML and HOL



On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:36:30PM +0800, ZHAO Wei wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 14:47, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > I remember vaguely that there used to be a licence problem with
> > Moscow ML. What is its exact licence now?
> 
> Under the mosml/copyright directory, there are three license files:
> 
> 1. gpl2 - which is exactly a copy of GPL v2
> 2. copyright.att - which covers part of the library come from SML/NJ,
> and as I read it, it's mostly BSDish
> 3. copyright.cl - covers code come from CAML Light, which looks a little
> bit strange, but to my unexperienced eyes, looks like a homebrew GPL
> 
> Anyway, I think it's generally acceptable to put it in Debian main.
> What's you opinion?

Please send license text that is unfamiliar to the Project to the
debian-legal list for vetting.  In your list above that would be both
items 2) and 3).  "BSDish" is not a guarantee of DFSG-freeness, and
furthermore, a license can be DFSG-free but not GPL-compatible, and if
a work contains material under the GPL and under a non-GPL-compatible
license, the result may not be distributable by the Debian Project at
all (or so much may have to be stripped out that there's no point
shipping the package).

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |     There's nothing an agnostic can't
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     do if he doesn't know whether he
branden@debian.org                 |     believes in it or not.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Graham Chapman

Attachment: pgp6UkE8uqgEx.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: