Bug#335185: upcoming newmat licence is "DFGL" free to me

[Philippe Coval <philippe.coval@laposte.net>]

Hi, great news for newmat :

- newmat package is ready  at mentors.debian.net
- new "DFSG" version is going to be released if everyone agrea with the
new licence at bottom

Robert Davies wrote:

> Someone seemed to think it didn't meet the
> Debian guidelines, but I don't see how.

It's clear for me :
###
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=335185;msg=57

> I welcome its distribution as part of low cost CD-ROM collections.

Here it seems that permission to distribute is granted, but only as part
of low cost CD-ROM collections.
No permission to distribute via other means seems to be granted.
Non-free.
###


>
> I'll delete the line about CD-ROM distributions, otherwise leave it as
> it is,

Ok then then it will be "free" : free to get, and distribute

> except I have noted who "I" is.

humm, sorry what do you mean ?

> (In the old days, people would submit programs to SIMTEL80 and then
> get upset
> when they found their way on to $25 CD-ROMS of software. I wanted to make
> it clear this wasn't a problem with newmat. But this is not relevant
> now).

Ok then non restriction on distribution that's free

>
> I'll leave in the comment about commercial use as otherwise I'll get
> emails
> about whether commercial use is OK.

ok

>
> The BSD and Thai software (=MIT?) licenses are unsatisfactory as

humm I suppose this text was a sample licence used by "Thai Open Source
Software Center",
just replace this by your name

>
> (1) they allow people to distribute modified versions without saying
> they are modified.

true, unless you add a clause to those licence

> (2) they don't protect me where I am neither the author or copyright
> holder.

are you sure ? It is often mentionned in the first line : Copyright (c)
<YEAR>, <OWNER>"

> (3) I am unclear what copyright applies to the license itself.

OK I got it, you were confused by the previous sample I gave (ThaiOSSC
vs MIT)
but  http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php is clear  (same
for BSD) see (2)

> (4) They are done by lawyers for lawyers, whereas I want something
> that users might read.

Unfortunatly not all users read licence, and you know where there is no
cop there is no law ...
Is a "custom" licence  "stronger" that a approved licence , when the
licence is actually read  ?

If I had to, I'll add that "modification notification clause" to some
approved licence

>
> As I understand it, my conditions fall into the Debian Guidelines.

Yea the distribution part was blocking , not anymore since "the low cost
CD" part is removed

>
> If you are happy with my version included below, 

I am, I am forwarding to the experts ,
wait a couple of days and check if noone complain at
http://bugs.debian.org/335185

> I'll make a new version of newmat10c

> that has these conditions in the html file and in a new file
> "copying.txt". 

please use AUTHORS  and COPYING
they will be triguerred by Scripts (as well as INSTALL README NEWS
ChangeLog )

> There
> probably won't be any other changes.

great, let me suggest to add my msvc-6 project files ( newmat.dsw ,
newmat.dsp , example.dsp )
I had to fix some namespace use (see under, my patch) to be supported by
msvc-6 , 7.1 and 8.0

> You are welcome to include your make file in the Debian version and
> use a different
> numbering system. 

Well I followed recomendations, but I think this is possible to name it
1.10.c would you prefer
(I avoided it because you also use beta name, which can not be sorted
alphabetically)

> I'll think about including a version of the make file like yours in
> newmat11. 

Please do, my patch is under the same licence as yours :
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/newmat/?C=M;O=D
( take latest .diff.gz file : )

> The make files I distribute are generated automatically 

do you use a custom tool for that ?
cmake can overcome with that nightmare I allready used it

> so I need to see
> what changes I need to make to the generate program to get yours and
> to provide the same
> facilities to other compilers that I support.

maybe having a "empty" config.h included in your include.h preserve
compatibility,
(both could be merged in a single usual config.h)

>
>
> Conditions of use.
>
> I place no restrictions on the use of newmat except that I take
> no liability for any problems that may arise from its use,
> distribution or other dealings with it.

ok

> You can use it in your commercial projects.

ok

>
> You can make and distribute modified or merged versions. 

under different licence ?

> You can
> include parts of it in your own software.

should it be mentionned ? should the licence be included also ?

>
> If you distribute modified or merged versions, please make it clear
> which parts are mine and which parts are modified.

and what about copied parts ? (previous statement )

>
> For a substantially modified version, simply note that it is, in
> part, derived from my software. A comment in the code will be
> sufficient.

sounds good

>
> The software is provided "as is", without warranty of any kind.
>
> Please understand that there may still be bugs and errors. Use at
> your own risk. I (Robert Davies) take no responsibility for any errors
> or omissions in this package or for any misfortune that may befall you
> or others as a result of your use, distribution or other dealings with
> it.

ok, generally Licences dont mentions names (projects or persons), then
they can be reused

>
>
> Robert
>
thank you for your time, I know this licence stuff is a borring task..

Take care

-- 
# http://rzr.online.fr -- xmpp:rzr[a]jabber.org -- sip:rzr@ekiga.net
# Related Obsession : http://rzr.online.fr/q/MathsSoftware