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

Re: Need advice: Package has a restrictive non-free modified MIT license




On 21/07/25 23:17, Luke W Faraone wrote:
On 21/07/2025 17:50, Aryan Karamtoth wrote:
I was also suggested by people on debian-mentors to consider adding it to non-free sources but it wouldn't make any sense for a python library to be a non-free package when the sole purpose of it is to be used by other dependent packages which might be free.

You always have the option of packaging it in non-free and placing the other dependent packages in contrib.

Cheers,
Luke Faraone

Hi Luke,

I do not wish to go that route as I want this package to be used by everyone without putting their packages in contrib or non-free.

Either way, this package was only used for some tests and I excluded those tests in the dependent package.

The author of this library just responded to my request to change the license [1] and said he will talk to some people and come to a decision about it.

If the author isn't willing to reconsider the license decision even after further discussion then I'll have no option but to drop the package as this is a python library that's meant to be a free software.

[1] https://github.com/BR1py/itertree/issues/40

--
Regards,

Aryan Karamtoth
Debian Contributor
IRC: SpaciousCoder78

GPG Fingerprint: 7A7D 9308 2BD1 9BAF A83B 7E34 FE90 07B8 ED64 0421

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xFE9007B8ED640421.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: