Yesterday's post about the licensing restrictions for fink's .patch files raises an interesting set of questions.
We've never stated any licensing rules for our .info or .patch files, although we have received contributions from hundreds of people. This was probably a mistake. It seemed evident to several of us on IRC this morning that the .patch file should be seen as inheriting the license of the software being patched. But what about the .info files? Should we declare them to be part of fink, and therefore under the GPL? Can we do this retroactively, even though we didn't make it clear to contributers in the past? -- Dave ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
