Laurent Chretienneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The CPAL is an OSI approved license.
That's informative, but not sufficient to show that *software* under that licence follows the DFSG. (OSI has lawyers advocating licences, while debian looks at software for users.) Would you explain:- - can section 14 be a requirement to display an advert and must the openproj software display such an advert? (possible DFSG 3 problem) - why is NPL replaced with CPAL in section 13? (merely strange) - why is Original Developer added? (less worrying) Thanks, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
