On Wed, 2012-27-06 at 23:13 +0200, Kai Storbeck wrote: > I'm a bit perplexed that the module authors have anything to do with > this as long as they are clearly stating their code is released under > the artistic license.
This is my position, stated somewhat more clearly. The particular license of the module does not matter as long as it follows DFSG. > Should Debian concern itself (too much) with the authority of such a > claim? Is it debians task to mediate between all open source forges > around the world and their claims for licensing? In this case, Debian could ask for a clarification from or a suitable agreement (as Apple has done) with OpenSSL. The problem for Debian is that Debian is not just distributing the source code from CPAN and OpenSSL has a weird clause (#5) in their license. > > Apologies if this is in the debian policy. -- --gh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1340834109.26197.98.ca...@cray.home.cotef.net
