[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Above and beyond the issue of distributing code without proper license >notices, the APSL 2.0 is not, in the opinion of many (and AFAICT, according >to the consensus of the debian-legal mailing list), a free license under the Where "many" in this context should be read as "an handful of people on the debian-legal mailing list who invented new rules which are not part of the DFSG".
>Again, while the question of which parts of the license (if any) fail the >DFSG is still somewhat open, the fact is that this license imposes a number >of restrictions on the licensee which are not present in more traditional >Free Software licenses. Now that it's known that this package is licensed >under the APSL and not under a BSD license, I believe it's best to remove >mdnsresponder from the archive until such a time as it's made available >under a different license or there's a clear consensus that the APSL 2.0 is >a DFSG-free license. Do you suggest removing from the archive all packages whose licenses impose uncommon restrictions or just this one? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
