Andrew Saunders wrote: >>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.
Of course we're not OSI, but don't forget that the OSI document originates in the DFSG. And I prefer to give them something that would be relevant also for other distros, not just Debian. > 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. Done. Suggested them with the MIT license. > Anyway, just a couple of suggestions. As I said at the start, thanks > for getting the ball rolling again. > > Cheers, > > -- > Andrew Saunders > > > -- Regards, Lior Kaplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Guides.co.il Debian GNU/Linux unstable (SID) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
