-=| Raphael Hertzog, 3.08.2007 12:45 |=- > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007, Damyan Ivanov wrote: >> Fresh sample - libemail-localdelivery-perl is created by Niko and Gregor >> wants to change something in the packaging. Is he allowed to do so? >> I am pretty confident that Niko does not mind this, of course, but IMHO >> these things are better explicitly stated. > > As long as we're speaking of packages uploaded to Debian, it's pretty > clear that anyone doing so respects the DFSG which explicitely requires > modifications (whatever license they had in mind doesn't care that much). Good point. The "pretty clear" above becomes slightly "blurred" when there is sponsoring involved[1], though. I am not saying sponsees have bad intentions, only my preference to have all this really clear. > I always assumed that any packaging work was available under the same > license as the program itself unless another license was explicitely > mentioned. It is not that uncommon for the program to contain files under different licenses, which makes it unclear what would be the implied packaging license. I agree that in many cases (probably most) everything is clear and sound if one does not mind making a few assumptions. I just prefer more safe default policy on this so I can concentrate on other aspects of the work without having to worry too much on legal uncertainties. Could adding packaging copyright/licensing information do any harm? [1] because sponsee might not yet have agreed to follow DFSG -- dam JabberID: dam@jabber.minus273.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature