Bug#687348: yforth has non-free copyright file (does not pass dfsg)
Grant H. sirgr...@member.fsf.org writes: After reviewing the copyright file[1] for the package yforth[2] I thought that it did not qualify as free software. Why do you say this? The intent of the author was clearly to be fully permissive as long as attribution is retained. For a fairly random piece of software not updated since 1997, I think your expectations for clarity are set way too high. Bdale -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#687348: yforth has non-free copyright file (does not pass dfsg)
A couple things, intent and what actually happens are two different things. According to Debian legal (as I linked above) it currently does not meet the DFSG which is the expectation it has to meet. Regardless, I got a response from Luca and he is willing to re-license it under a established free software license which will meet the DFSG. He says he will release an updated tarball. I will ask him to possibly contact you when that is complete for re-packaging. On 09/11/2012 10:59 PM, Bdale Garbee wrote: Grant H. sirgr...@member.fsf.org writes: After reviewing the copyright file[1] for the package yforth[2] I thought that it did not qualify as free software. Why do you say this? The intent of the author was clearly to be fully permissive as long as attribution is retained. For a fairly random piece of software not updated since 1997, I think your expectations for clarity are set way too high. Bdale -- *Grant H. *Email: sirgr...@member.fsf.org *Ask me for my GPG key *I'm an FSF member -- Help us support software freedom! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#687348: yforth has non-free copyright file (does not pass dfsg)
Grant H. sirgr...@member.fsf.org writes: A couple things, intent and what actually happens are two different things. Of course I understand that. But what bothers me in this and other cases is that you're asserting that it fails the DFSG without explaining *how* you think it fails the DFSG. And I've been around long enough that I helped *draft* the DFSG... According to Debian legal (as I linked above) it currently does not meet the DFSG which is the expectation it has to meet. That's not at all how I read the contents of the thread you linked to. Of course it would be easier if the software has a familiar license, but the lack of that doesn't mean it's not DFSG compliant. Regardless, I got a response from Luca and he is willing to re-license it under a established free software license which will meet the DFSG. He says he will release an updated tarball. I will ask him to possibly contact you when that is complete for re-packaging. Ok, fine. It's certainly easy enough to update the package if/when he does that. Bdale pgpaTyesgekmJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#687348: yforth has non-free copyright file (does not pass dfsg)
Ok, well I am sorry if I bothered you. I honestly didn't come here tostart a fight and maybe should have been more clear. I also agree that if he is willing to change the license that makes for an easy solution. But to answer your question as to why I think it is not dfsg free it is in the debian-legal response I got from Francesco Poli[1]. He clearly states that it is not DFSG free for the following reasons: I think the above-quoted license is extremely vague and ambiguous. It's not at all clear what the term use is supposed to cover. Is copying allowed? Modifying? Redistributing (gratis or in exchange of a fee)? Distributing modified copies? None of these activities is explicitly permitted. As a consequence, this license does not (clearly) meet the DFSG. [1]http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2012/09/msg00018.html -- *Grant H. *Email: sirgr...@member.fsf.org *Ask me for my GPG key *I'm an FSF member -- Help us support software freedom! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#687348: yforth has non-free copyright file (does not pass dfsg)
Package: yforth Version: 0.1beta-23 Severity: serious User: trisq...@trisquel.info Usertags: trisquel, libreplanet After reviewing the copyright file[1] for the package yforth[2] I thought that it did not qualify as free software. I contacted the debian legal list[3] and they informed me that the copyright for yforth does not meet the DFSG. I contacted the upstream developer and asked him to consider changing the software license per the legal recommendation. However, I wanted to report this issue in case the developer is unwilling to change the license for the software. [1]http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/y/yforth/yforth_0.1beta-21/copyright [2]http://packages.debian.org/source/squeeze/yforth [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2012/09/msg00017.html -- *Grant H. *Email: sirgr...@member.fsf.org *Ask me for my GPG key *I'm an FSF member -- Help us support software freedom! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
