Re: sugarcrm licence issue

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:13:31PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Various people believe the MPL to be non-free, but there's code under it
>> in the main archive at the moment so it's unlikely that an upload would
>> be rejected for that reason. Exhibit B basically says "You can't call it
> 
> The code under it in the main archive is there under the claim that it's
> currently in the process of being dual-licensed under the GPL, so it should
> be very likely.

No, that's not even roughly true. Other packages that are MPLed include:

mozilla-stumbleupon
nqc
tdom
brickos
openmcu
mozilla-ldapsdk
Portions of nail
bonsai
bugzilla
pilot-syncmal
t38modem
malsync
Possibly parts of firebird (no, not the Mozilla project)
libsaxon-java
zope-rdfgrabber
lnpd

This is based on the contents of their copyright files. Can we please
stop this "The only code under the MPL is Mozilla" argument?
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org