[firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: Debian Linux] - re: rpl
I'd like to package this utility which I've found quite useful,
anyway, there were some questions that I raised regarding the license,
"not modified in any way, and it is not sold for profit."
The author has clarified somewhat below, but I don't know if this is
enough to get into main...
Could anyone offer some advice to a relatively new maintainer?
----- Forwarded message from Joe Laffey <email@example.com> -----
Delivery-date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:55:56 -0500
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:51:36 -0600 (CST)
From: Joe Laffey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Aubin Paul <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Debian Linux
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Aubin Paul wrote:
> I am a maintainer for Debian GNU/Linux, and I'm intending to make a
> binary package of rpl for the distribution as I find it an invaluable
> utility. In any case, as you may or may not know, Debian is split up
> into groups based on licensing. rpl seems to fall into non-free,
> because of this part of the license:
> "modified in any way, and it is not sold for profit."
> I need to get an idea of what you mean by this. Generally, it is
> completely legal to distribute and resell Debian GNU/Linux's official
> release, but not the non-free section.
> I just need to get a quick word from you that specifies whether rpl is
> allowed to be sold as 'part' of a distribution, or whether it cannot
> be sold in any form.
I see what you mean. I will revise that with the next release. Selling a
CD-ROM or a distribution with rpl on it is fine. I just don't want someone
coming along and saying "Buy rpl for $19.95" or anything like that. If
your legal folks need that revised I can do so sooner rather than later.
Ideally you would make a package with the 1.3.0b1 version. However, I am
hoping to get some beta feedback on that. I have tested it internally, but
it could stand a little more testing. I would appreciate any feedback from
you or anyone you know about the functionality of the latest version.
> Also, slight modifications to Makefile may need to be made to build
> the package? Do you object to this? If you could clarify, that would
> help a lot.
That is not a problem at all. The Build script is really basic. It just
compiles with cc -O2 I believe. If changes are needed no problem. I would
rather more people use rpl!
Copy it, make a package of it, sell it with a distro (just not by itself).
Please send me any feedback or bug reports, though!! Also, when you have
made a package may I distribute that package from the offical website? If
so, please send me a copy of the package (tar.gz or RPM or whatever).
LAFFEY Computer Imaging
St. Louis, MO
----- End forwarded message -----