Christopher Faylor wrote: >I've just read the BSDPL finally and I see that it tries to >impose itself on any distribution which contains a binary which is >licensed in this fashion. So, as was hinted at earlier in the thread, >this makes the license viral. So, you're right. We can't use it since >including it would change the licensing of the entire distribution. > But is "minimal patching ni order to port" considered distributing a "dreivative work" or a "binary"?
Anyway, as far as I understood from the source on opensource.org ML, the author didn't really mean to mean that "that way", so I could ask the author himself if he can personally allow an exception for cases such as this one? If that could help, or it wouldn't help anyway? Lapo -- Lapo Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (OpenPGP & X.509) www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)