Sorry not to get back to you sooner. I'm just getting a lot of post-vacation mail pile up.
A copyleft license sounds like it would work. In particular I would be happy to distribute it under Common Development and Distribution License On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote: > Hi Jim, > > I just want to make sure that your question about license suggestions > was answered this time and you are not waiting for further input as last > time. Please let us know about the status like: I'm working on > relicensing with colleagues and officials / I need further input / I do > not consider any license change. We just need to adapt our actions > accordingly. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:38:25AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > > > do you consider Michael's hint helpful. As you know we are taking > > licensing issues serious (I'm wondering whether the people you want to > > protect your code from are doing so as well or whether you are just > > keeping away from using the code the honest one who care ;-) ). Please > > let us know if you want us to remove the affected code from Debian by > > removing about 10 BioConductor packages. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Andreas. > > > > Mental note to myself: > > I somehow could imagine a "Free your code for Christmas" initiative > > in general. May be we should think about this for 2016 at least. > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 09:18:36AM +0000, Michael Crusoe wrote: > > > If you are looking to ensure that derivative works aren't relicensed, > and > > > you want to use an existing license (which I recommend) then you are > > > looking for a copyleft license. > > > > > > I like this interactive guide to software licenses: > > > http://oss-watch.ac.uk/apps/licdiff/ > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015, 10:35 Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jim, > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 09:03:50AM +0100, Jim Kent wrote: > > > > > Perhaps I did not phrase it directly enough. I ended my last > email with > > > > > > > > Perhaps in your files is a license that has a word or two on > this > > > > > subject > > > > > > > > already? > > > > > > > > > > By this I mean, do you have a license that mentions something > about not > > > > > allowing sublicenses on the license? Could you send it to me if > you do? > > > > > > > > I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean by "sublicenses". Do you think > > > > that redistribution of possibly changed code is "sublicensing"? > Please > > > > check whether the license you have in mind will have any conflict > with > > > > the following DFSG guidelines which are widely accepted as open > source > > > > definition: > > > > > > > > https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines > > > > > > > > If you see any conflict in any of these items we probably can not > find > > > > any license that will fit your needs. It would help if you would > > > > exactly specify what you want to approach with the license. > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > > > Andreas. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://fam-tille.de > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Debian-med-packaging mailing list > > > > debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org > > > > > > > > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging > > > > > > > > -- > > http://fam-tille.de > > -- > http://fam-tille.de >
