Re: cc65 license check -- main or non-free?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
|
| If upstream is still active, please ask him about that. There might be a
| reason for the license still being there; if not, it'd be best if he
| removed it.
|
|
I just sent this upstream:
| On your page you have the 'old' cc65 license listed, but yet I can't find
| any reference to it in any of your source files, and diffing your sources
| with the old sources fails to produce any matches. Is ANY of the code in
| cc65 from the original 1989 compiler, or is it a complete rewrite? I'd like
| to see the package in the actual Debian archives, but it can't be decided if
| it's "main" or "non-free" because some of us can't figure out whether or not
| the old 1989 license applies to anything. Thanks.
FWIW, the page (www.cc65.org) seems a little contradictory on whether or not
the old license actually applies any more, and then he also mentions the
program being a 'rewrite'. If somebody else would like to audit it, I'd much
appreciate it, but at the same time I'm reasonably certain that none of the
new code is derived from the old code. I recall a statement from the
upstream saying he didn't like the old license, which is why he rewrote the
program, but now I can't find it (arg).
(Packages are currently on m.d.n, or at [1], original 1989 source is [2].)
[1] http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~cutler/debian/
[2] http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~cutler/debian/cc65-src.arc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA24O17INBcI5MG5ARArLLAJ0RhcLmrH1vL08IzVC77vVVuPZgXQCdGNsr
dcUbtt+l7YMQhvXTZWs5F8U=
=vgVL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: