Paul,
Would it be the moderator's duty to
enforce or at least label contributions that do not comply with the
GPL?
I don't know that enforcement is necessary (unless there is a GPL
violation), but I do think that any contrib web site should *clearly*
indicate what the redistribution license is for a given software module
or document. The GPL is one license and is certainly the one used by
the majority of open source developers, but it is certainly conceivable
that someone might choose to license their code under, say, the BSD
license.
If you look at freshmeat or sourceforge, they all have such fields in their
info about hosted software.
Thanks for the clear explanation, this is what I am hoping we will see.
Now, commercial software could really not be *hosted* on the web site,
due to redistribution issues, but if such entries are allowed in the
contrib system database, as links to their home web sites, then the
license should be noted as "Proprietary" or "Commercial" or something
like that.
This maybe explains why Darrell has an empty listing on e-smith.
Perhaps because his contributions are "Proprietary, Commercial or
something else so he wants to keep them off e-smith.org..
--
Dan York, Product Line Manager, 6000 Managed Application Server
Mitel Networks Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph: +1-613-592-2122 Cell: +1-613-263-4312 Fax: +1-613-592-1175
350 Legget Drive, Ottawa, ON, K2K 2W7 Canada
http://www.mitel.com/smallbusiness/
Regards,
Paul Miller
--
Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues
Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
