On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 12:43:00PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 12:24:00PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > > > The original Artistic license is not appropriate for licensing > > anything that is not approximately perl, because of the way it is > > worded. It is a terrible license. Do not use it. It's also highly > > questionable as to whether things licensed under it can be included in > > Debian, given the prohibitions on commercial distribution. Please ask > > upstream to replace it with the Clarified Artistic license (or some > > other free software license) before this is included in Debian. > > > > The upstream author has kindly relicensed under the Clarified Artistic > Licence. > > (Please Cc me on any -legal correspondence, I'm not subscribed). Thanks for your work to rectify this issue! -- G. Branden Robinson | Notions like Marxism and Debian GNU/Linux | Freudianism belong to the history branden@debian.org | of organized religion. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Noam Chomsky
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature