Re: aspell with mutt
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 11:41:34PM -0600 or thereabouts, Jacob S. wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 20:39:28 -0500
> Stephen <dallan@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> > Well that's too bad, why now, has the license changed from before?
> >
> > I happen to like Aspell much better, so hopefully you can clarify
> > what's the issue with the Aspell license.
>
> I'm afraid I'm not a wealth of knowledge here, but I noticed it in the
> list of "Removed Packages" in the recent release announcement of Debian
> 3.0r2 on the Debian-announce list.
>
> Looking at http://master.debian.org/~joey/3.0r2/ I notice it is actually
> on the Accepted list, though they have this note with it:
> "The license incorrectly says that it's LGPL but it is in fact a unique
> license which is non-DFSG-free."
OK, thanks for the info. Puzzling, that this is just coming to light now,
as Aspell has been around for some time. It doesn't sound like the
license has changed, just that it's being reinterpreted. :)
--
Reply to: