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

pine license

[was Re: Debian AMD64 Archive Move]

On Tue, 10 May 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:

> > Just establish the non-free section and move everything over.  If anyone
> > complains then just drop the package they're complaining about.  Of course,
> > NO ONE is going to complain since they know we will "become" Debian soon
> > anyway (and for all intents we ARE Debian - just not on their server), and
> > they've already given Debian permission to distribute.  For the rest of
> > non-free, permission to distribute is not an issue, and not the reason
> > they're in non-free to begin with.
> The pine author would for one thing.

Can we stop with that particular piece of FUD?  The authors of Pine have
no problems with third-party redistribution of of their software as long
as the version number contains an L to show it is not the pristine UW
version.  We don't distribute it because we follow the letter of their
license which unfortunately doesn't match their intentions and even more
unfortunately they are not in a hurry to fix.  But the authors of Pine
don't mind at all.  They even have a page of links to third party ports [1]
for heavens sake!

[1] http://www.washington.edu/pine/getpine/non-UW.html

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Reply to: