Re: Ghostscript licensing changed to AGPL
On Wed, 7 May 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Yes. But this isn't as bad as you think, because the source
> availability requirement exists only if you modify the AGPL'd
> software.
Which you may want to do, in order to patch a security issue
you just found, locally, before filing it upstream.
Or because you’re a user of Debian and used to be able to do
just that.
This basically fails “Licence must not be specific to Debian”
if you assume the “did not modify so this clause does not
apply” case.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
[16:04:33] bkix: "veni vidi violini"
[16:04:45] bkix: "ich kam, sah und vergeigte"...
Reply to: