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

Re: copyright file problems

On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 07:29:58PM +0100, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> Hello,
> Since I started working on the ftp archive, I've found at least three
> packages in incoming which come with a licence like this:
> This library is free software; you can redistribute it
> and/or modify it under the same terms as Perl itself.
> This might be clear for the experienced linux user/admin, but it does not
> say anything for beginners, who haven't lived in the free software world
> for years like us. I've rejected the first two packages from incoming
> asking to at least point to the corresponding licences in
> /usr/share/common-licences (I've been called a fascist for this once ;)).
> I'd like to hear about your opinion on how to handle this case, because
> this seems to be a problem with quite a lot of packages. Perhaps a policy
> modification/clarification could help the case.

`The same licence as perl' is one of the most popular license in
the free world. And I like it because I dont have to look
into every perl module's copyright for 2 pages of text, which
points you to 2 other licenses and then explains how to
use one of them.
You shouldnt shut down packages just for using this
without prior consensus that this practice have to be finished.
There is neither consensus nor even a discusion on this topic !
If you really find the same as perl licence a problem, submit
as wishlist bug to package containing `/usr/share/common-licenses/'

Reply to: