Re: summary of software licenses in non-free
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 04:28:46PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Wouter Verhelst <wouter@grep.be>
> > Op di 13-01-2004, om 00:48 schreef Anthony DeRobertis:
>
> > > >> good idea. perhaps something easily parsable like:
> > > >> Non-DFSG: 1, 3, 5
>
> > > I don't think it'd be sufficient to do that with. DFSG 3, for example,
> > > is _very_ broad.
>
> > Yes, I know. So is 5, which makes it a lot less efficient for the
> > purpose I suggested. Still, that was only an example; and if it is to be
> > implemented, it should have an advisory character, at best.
>
> The problem is that it would be hard to make use of such a line
> without confusing uninitiated users. For example, if a package in
> non-free had
>
> Non-DFSG: 3
What about : Non-DFSG: 3 [rationale for 3].
> and a tool that parsed that displayed
>
> This package is non-free because
> - it does not allow modifications and distribution of modified source.
And now, the tool would show :
- it does not allow unhindered distribution of modified sources
bacause of : rationale for 3
Let's drop does not allow modification, since there is not a single
licence which will legally be able to stop you from modifying any piece
of source code you may have, as long as you don't distribute it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: