Re: MPL license

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Damyan Ivanov <divanov@creditreform.bg> wrote:
> Walter Landry wrote:
> > Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 04:21:31PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> Whats debian-legals position about the MPL?
> >>> Looking at google I see a lot of "Summary - non-free" and "Not really
> >>> non-free" mails.
> >> It is indeed non-free.
> > 
> > It is, in fact, not distributable as an executable by Debian.  It
> > requires keeping the source around for every binary for at least six
> > months.
> > 
> > It also has problems with choice of venue.
> 
> If MPL is cast on stone as non-distributable, I guess I must take the
> necessary steps to get firebird2 out of the archive?
> 
> firebird2 uses Interbase Public License 1.0 and Initial Developer
> Public License (1.0), both of which are MPL-based with "Mozilla
> Foundation" replaced with "Borland" and "Initial developer"
> respectively. Both IPL and IDPL have source of venue clauses and
> requirement to keep source available for some fixed period of time.

Assuming that the Debian mirrors are ok with choice of venue clauses,
an alternative is to have a firebird2-src package like qmail-src.  I
don't know how hard that is.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu