On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 05:30:12PM +1100, Marc Bradshaw wrote: > Patrice Dumas wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 10:42:30AM +1100, Marc Bradshaw wrote: > > > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | doc | Not found in nonfree-devel > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | doc | Not found in nonfree-F-8 > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | doc | Not found in nonfree-F-9 > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | sl | Not found in nonfree-devel > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | sl | Not found in nonfree-F-8 > >>> packages_[AT]_marcbradshaw.co.uk | sl | Not found in nonfree-F-9 > >>> > > > > Isn' tthere a free implementation of sl that would be suitable for > > fedora? I know that it was in debian and it is in gentoo. > > > > -- > > Pat > > > The packaged version uses the same upstream as the debian package. The > deb copyrights file states "Everyone is permitted to do anything on this > program including copying, modifying, and improving, unless you try to > pretend that you wrote it. i.e., the above copyright notice has to > appear in all copies. THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY WITH > REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE." however, I was unable to find a similar > statement in the upstream source or associated website. Although from > the context it is clear that it is distributable without a clear > statement of the licence under which the program is distributed and > after consultation with dribble lead Ian, we decided the package was > more suited to dribble than to fedora. > That being said, I am happy to discuss it. :)
Indeed I didn't found any license, and I sent a mail to the author. In the mean time, unless I am wrong it is in fact illegal for rpmfusion to distribute sl since a copyright and no license means no right to redistribute. However it is very very unlikely that it is the author intent, so better wait for a reply. -- Pat
