At Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:51:40 +0000,
MJ Ray wrote:
>
> I think some copyright holders of software under AGPLv3 have stated
> that linking to an upstream download site is sufficient provision of
> access for the parts you did not modify, regardless of the
> availability of that site, which would clear DFSG 4 and reduce the
> 1/3/6 concerns immensely. For example
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/08/msg00056.html
> There is nothing in the FSF FAQ about this yet either way.
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html
>
> Would libfunambol-cpp-client-api's copyright holders agree to make a
> similar statement?
>
Perhaps; they have expressed willingness to make some efforts to help
Debian, although this was about the issue of whether section 13
applies to client code.
You might want to follow up on the thread in debian-legal
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/11/msg00046.html
I understand someone from Funambol is following that thread.
It would be nice to have some concensus about what, if any exceptions
are required for AGPL software to be in main.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
