Hi,
I just wanted to make sure my understanding of this issue is correct
before I start filing bugs.
I was investigating the #326236 feedparser ITP when I noticed that the
license is described as simply "Python". While that's pretty unambiguous
because it also includes a copy of the Python Software Foundation
License, that starts out with:
1. This LICENSE AGREEMENT is between the Python Software Foundation
("PSF"), and the Individual or Organization ("Licensee") ...
which isn't valid when it's actually an agreement between Mark Pilgrim
and the user.
This affects quodlibet-plugins (amazon.py, same author and same
problem), straw (feedparser and feedfinder), rss2email (feedparser),
rawdog (feedparser and feedfinder), gdesklets-data (feedparser), and of
course #326236, the feedparser ITP. It also probably affects other
Python modules in the archive.
I sent an email to Mark Pilgrim on December 4th asking for clarification
on this, but haven't gotten a response yet.
Is this assesment accurate? Should I file bugs?
--
Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part