Re: the perennial pine licensing problem
Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Peter S Galbraith <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
> > Okay for non-free pretty much only means okay to redistribute
> > modified binaries (I assume we have to modify it for Debian).
> > The third case (c) doesn't apply for an ftp site, but CDROM
> > makers will care.
> Isn't it the normal situation with non-free that CD makers need to care?
They need to check each license, but there's certainly stuff in
non-free that can't go on resold CDROMs.
In any case, I agree with Santiago's objections to my initial
reading and don't think it can go in non-free with current