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

Re: Looking for sponsor for Gnosis-Utils, pure python package

I have consulted the people on debian-legal, and it seems I have been
pointed to a reasonable solution[1]. The original author is also happy
with it.

It turns out only the articles discussing the python module and its
implementation are non-PD. All the code, and some of the plain text
files are in the Public Domain. So, what I've done is take out the
articles, put in an extra document with pointers to where these can be
found, and then packaged the rest.

I have updated the package I put on the following page:


Anyone willing to help me make it worthy of inclusion, and later on
sponsor it?


1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/debian-legal-200402/msg00079.html

On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>Magnus Therning wrote:
>> Well, from my reading of the license, and my inspection of the source
>> code, all but some articles are Public Domain. I am making sure this is
>> correct. If this is so (all python source in PD), then it would be
>> acceptable for Debian?
>You probably should discuss this with debian-legal, including whether
>the PD notice is acceptable as is. AFAICT people seem to be happier if a
>thing says license even if the license itself is very liberal (with
>common license wordings (MIT,GPL,etc.) preferred.
>For the non-pd stuff: I'd think *everything* in the package has to be
>free. (See recent threads about non-free in debian-devel for comparison
>with packages that are deemed to be not free.
>Thomas Viehmann, <http://beamnet.de/tv/>

Magnus Therning                    (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)

The seven worst words in cyberspace are "You just don't get it, do you?"
     -- Bob Metcalfe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: