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

Re: [Debian] Majordomo will be removed (fwd)

On Sun, Jun 04, 2000 at 05:24:14PM -0700, Jonathan Morace wrote:
> >Majordomo is *not* open source software.  It doesn't fulfil the
> >conditions of the Open Source Definition.  In particular, as this
> >security problem has been noticed and Debian is unable to fix it and
> >distribute a fixed version because of the license, there is little
> >choice left but to remove it in the first instance.  It bears little
> >resemblance to the Apache license.
> I just reviewed the open source definition, and I am a little confused
> which rule you think it does not conform to.
> I think rule 4 describes the license requirement very well.  If I'm
> reading it right, that is what the license says.
>        4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code.
>        The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in
> modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch
> files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at
> build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software
> built from modified source code. The  license may require derived works to
> carry a different name or version number from the original 
> software. (rationale) 

Good point, I'm not certain why it's in non-free.  I'm passing it on
to debian-legal and the majordomo maintainer for someone with more
expertise to answer.



  Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
        Debian GNU/Linux Developer,  see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
  Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/

Reply to: