Henning Makholm wrote: > Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > So, Debian might be happy because they have clarified that > > linking against XForms is okay. But, am I to conclude that > > Debian doesn't agree with their argument that while they were > > using the GPL without clarification they were still okay > > license-wise because they were doing the linking in original > > work? > > Careful here. The authors themselves were okay before. They don't need > to stick to the restrictions they impose on others. > > Debian, however, would not have been okay to do what the author's did, > because the authors had not permitted Debian to do it. > > > I mentioned this problem to the author earlier > > and he didn't see a problem since he was doing the linking > > upstream, so it was implied to be okay. > > Debian does its own linking and needs permission to do so. > Think of build demons. Think of NMUs, security fixes...
Sorry. I meant to say that the author links it to XForms and expects users to do so as well, since it's in the Makefile (and it's logical). But okay, I give up. I'll follow the rules. Joseph is correct when he says you can't always expect laws to make sense. Peter