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

Bug#321178: A couple of points...

> The x3270 package was previously removed from the archive due to
> licensing issues (see #248853 for details).

I was the submitter of that bug. Thanks for following up on this.

Just a couple of points, though, if I may:

> The issue is whether your "public use" conforms to the OSI open
> source definition (http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php).

No. We're not OSI; the issue is whether or not it conforms to Debian's
Free Software Guidelines.

Also, for simplicity's sake, you might want to suggest a known-good
license that's already had some form of review. It saves the copyright
holder the trouble of wading through the DFSG, and eliminates the
possibility of their interpreting them in such as way as to
accidentally relicense their stuff under terms that *still* don't make
the cut. In #248853, Nathaniel Nerode suggested the MIT/X11-like or
the Georgia Institute of Technology licenses... Either of those'd be
just dandy.

Anyway, just a couple of suggestions. As I said at the start, thanks
for getting the ball rolling again.


Andrew Saunders

Reply to: