Re: Possible copyright violation wrt SNNS
This would be my position: once you edit in the "debian" subdirectory, you
are modifying the source tree. I don't see any way of satisfying the
license other than by distributing source patches and letting the user
build, as is done with Pine. This is annoying at best, and the Pine
license is actually one of the principal motivations for Mutt.
There is almost certainly no way to get this into Potato now.
-- Mike
On 2000-05-22 at 18:54 -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> I think there is also a body of opinion that the mere act of making a
> debian package constitutes "distributing a modified version".
Reply to: