Le Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:20:51AM -0000, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > > Thomas, > > > > It's not my position to get into Debian's debate. I can confirm for you > > that Ext JS can absolutely be licensed under GPL v3 without qualification. > > If there is commentary that can be read counter to that, then that is not a > > good read of what we are saying. From a legal standpoint, Ext JS can be > > licensed under GPL v3, or alternatively under a Commercial License from Ext > > JS. We put no conditions on the GPL v3 use, other than those of GPL v3 > > itself. > > > > ~ Adam > > Nobody is asking for debate, but if you were to write yourself "We put no > conditions on the GPL v3 use, other than those of GPL v3 itself." ends any > starting debate indeed, but then what you have write on your website is > kind of confusing (at least to some of us). > > Now, I wonder what other people from Debian will say after this declaration.
I think that the position, as well as the website, are crystal clear. The ‘Quick Overview’ is not a license by itself, it simply tries to summarise in two lines what copyleft means, and is not an additional restriction to the GPL. debian-de...@l.d.o is a good place to hear some advices, but the only persons who veto packages in Debian are our archive administrators, an none of them has objected against libjs-extjs. In my opinion, just go ahead and it will be fine :) Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
