Re: Fwd: ng-spice-rework_18.dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED

["Gudjon I. Gudjonsson" <gudjon@gudjon.org>]

Hi list
    I packaged ngspice some months ago but I have had problems getting it into 
Debian. Andreas kindly uploaded it for me but today I got the following 
rejection message from Debian legal team.
> > ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
> >
> > Subject: ng-spice-rework_18.dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED
> > Date: Saturday 28 March 2009
> > From: Joerg Jaspert <ftpmaster@debian.org>
> > To: "Gudjon I. Gudjonsson" <gudjon@gudjon.org>, tille@debian.org
> >
> > Hi Maintainer,
> >
> > rejected, I have two problems here. The first is the CIDER license. It
> > says
> >
> > (a)  The recipient agrees not to charge for the University of
> >     California code itself.  The recipient may, however, charge
> >     for additions, extensions, or support.
> >
> > which is non-free. If the intention was to have something like the MIT
> > style, "free of charge", then the wording from there should be
> > copied. But the above is non-free, as it forbids to sell the code.
> >
> > And then I found the info files in the source tarball. They do have the
> > license statement
> >
> >     Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and
> >     its documentation for educational, research and non-profit
> >     purposes, without fee, and without a written agreement is hereby
> >     granted, provided that the above copyright notice, this paragraph
> >     and the following three paragraphs appear in all copies.
> >
> > which is clearly non-free and as such can not go to main or contrib.
> > Upstream either has to relicense this under a free license or you have
> > to move to non-free or you have to delete those files.
> >
> > --
> > bye Joerg
> >
> >
> >
> > ===
> >
> > Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
> > your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
> > concerns.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------

I see three options:
1. Move it to non-free. The problem is that some people don't include the 
non-free packages in their sources.list file and I must ask for autobuilding. 
Are there any other disadvantages?

2. Remove the documentation and Cider and make Debian free package.

3. Make both free and non-free package.

I personally prefer option 1. The upstream team has put a lot of effort into 
the licensing issues before the latest release and I think these last issues 
will be dealt with in near future.

Do you have any opinion?

Regards
Gudjon