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

Re: Perl module license clarification



It's always usefull when people bring an issue up before a list to
provide appropriate links to the context in which the decisions are
being made, and or prior discussion on the decision. The threads on
debian-perl[1][2] dealing with this issue explain the problems pretty
well, and Colin and James come to (roughly) the same conclusions that
I did.

One of the issues raised in this thread, but not alluded to in the
parent message is that Michael G Schwern (upstream) uses the "under
the same terms as perl itself" and then only links to the Artistic
license.[3] Michael should clarify in the copyright/license statement
whether he means gpl+artistic or artistic only, due to the dissonance
between these two statements.


Don Armstrong

1:http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2003/debian-perl-200301/msg00002.html
2:http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2003/debian-perl-200302/msg00007.html
3:http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2003/debian-perl-200302/msg00008.html
-- 
We were at a chinese resturant.
He was yelling at the waitress because there was a typo in his fortune
cookie.
 -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/batch31.php

http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Attachment: pgpldTHsQOGi0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: