[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Unclear license information regarding copyleft


Am 15.05.2018 um 20:04 schrieb Walter Landry:
> Sven Bartscher <sven.bartscher@weltraumschlangen.de> writes:
>> As there are some problems[1] with the compiled shared library as
>> distributed by upstream (and because compiling things ourselves is
>> always nicer) I would like to rebuild the library when building the
>> Debian package, though I'm not sure if it is clear in the given
>> situation that it is legal to recompile the library and distribute the
>> resulting shared library. But maybe someone smarter than me can
>> enlighten me.
> I think you have to ask upstream about this (i.e. Tarn Adams).  Absent
> any other information, I would think that you could not recompile the
> source into a new binary.  It is probably just an oversight on the part
> of the Dwarf Fortress developers.

I already tried to do that, but haven't received an answer in 4 months.
Sorry, I forgot to mention that in my previous post.

> I would phrase it as asking what license that part is under.  There are
> a few obvious choices: LGPL 2.1 or later (to match SDL), MIT, or
> Apache.  Please do not suggest a custom license.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: