Re: "VIGRA Artistic License" changes
"Florent Bayle" <email@example.com> wrote in message
From: Ullrich Koethe <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
Would the suggested changes satisfy the Debian folks? Another option would
be to place VIGRA under either the artistic license (in its current
version) and the GPL, at the discretion of the user.
Well I think the changes suggested make it probably DFSG-free. The only last
thing I see is this:
> b. use the modified Library only within your corporation or
This does not let me (a regular person) make a private modifed copy.
Perhaps saying 'use the modified version privately, which includes use
limited to within your corporation, or organization'. would work. That
sounds awful though.
As for GPL comptability, there are possibly a few other issues, but they
depend on interpretation.
The dual-licencing with the GPL is widely accepted, and ensures that your
program is gpl compatible even if your desired 'less restrictive' terms have
uncertain gpl compatibility.
Should Ullrich Koethe decide to dual licence, then unless the package
contains stolen code, kiddie pr0n, or somthing similar, I doubt debian-legal
will have any objections.
Florent Bayle, if by monday nobody else has written please pass the concepts
found in this message upstream.