On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:39:43PM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
> However, you said that the author is resposive. At a minimum, I think
> that the paragraph
> > The tool set can be distributed as part of other non-commercial program
> > packages, but only in its original, unadapted form. If anybody is
> > interested in providing the tools as integrated part of another
> > package, this must be negotiated.
> has to go. I don't think that special permission for Debian will
A requirement for special permission for Debian is ok in non-free,
if that special permission has been granted.
> Also, the phrase
> > You may adapt the functionality of the program to your local needs,
> > but you are forbidden to redistribute copies of the files comprising
> > the software which were altered in any respect. If you add a
> > valuable feature, or hunt down a bug, you are welcome to contact the
> > author by email (firstname.lastname@example.org) and the fix or feature
> > will be most certainly integrated into the one and only official
> > release.
> is worrisome, since that means that any security problems or serious
> bugs will kick it out of Debian, even if the fix is trivial. This is
> even more pressing since you said that the project has mostly stalled.
This means that if there's a security problem or a "damages the user's
system" problem we'll have to replace the insecure package with an empty
package with a note explaining the conflict introduced by the license.
[The empty package obviously won't have the security problem, and
obviously won't contain any material which we're not prohibitted from
All in all, this doesn't sound like a great situation, but if enough
people value it, maybe it's worth putting some effort into it...