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

Re: Bug#278940: ITP: socket++ -- lightweight convenience library to handle low level BSD sockets in C++



Dan Weber wrote:
> * Package name    : socket++
>   Version         : 1.12.12
>   Upstream Author : Gnanasekaran(Sekar) Swaminathan <gs4t@virginia.edu>,
>   	   	    Herbert Straub <herbert@linuxhacker.at>
> * URL             : http://www.linuxhacker.at/socketxx
> * License         : Pasted below with License Statement
>   Description     : lightweight convenience library to handle low level BSD sockets in C++
> 
[snip long description]
>
> -- License
> 
> Original Copyright Notice:
> 
> Permission is granted to use at your own risk and distribute this software
> in source and  binary forms provided  the above copyright notice and  this
> paragraph are  preserved on all copies.  This software is provided "as is"
> with no express or implied warranty.

This license alone would not be sufficient, since it does not allow
modification.  However...

> Copyright Statement:
> 
>>>Got your message. Please feel free to include it in
>>>any software and use it as you please. Let me know if
>>>you need any help with it.
> 
> and further:
> +++
> Hi Herbert,
> 
> That was not the intention. It is a free code. You can modify,
> copy, and distribute and use it in anyway as you see fit.
> 
> Other people are maintaining it and ported it to different
> OSes. Other than that, not much has changed as far as I know.
> I haven't looked at it recently.
> 
> -Sekar

... this clarification makes the software clearly DFSG-Free (though it
would be preferable if this mail explicitly referred to socket++ and not
just "it" :) ).

> -- Side Note
> 
> This ITP is being cross posted to debian-legal for the purpose of verifying
> that this is capable of being placed in main.

Definitely.  Be sure to include the clarification in the copyight file
along with the original license.

- Josh Triplett

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: