Re: licensing for libpam-pwfile (ITP)
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Antonio Radici <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I'm adopting libpam-pwfile and while checking the licenses in the source
> package I've found that part of it is a derivative work of this code:
s/adopting/packaging/ ? libpam-pwfile doesn't seem to be in Debian.
> Is this a proper "license"?
Not a very well written one. Definitely doesn't belong in Debian main
in any case.
> I've sent a mail upstream asking if he could adopt a more descriptive
> license which
> states clearly how to handle derivative work but I haven't got any reply so
Please ask them to choose one of the common DFSG-free licenses instead
of writing their own.