Bug#47845: libdbd-pg-perl nonfree?
Package: libdbd-pg-perl Version: 0.92-1 >From the manual page: COPYRIGHT The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public License or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution without the prior approval of the author. -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#47845: libdbd-pg-perl nonfree?
On Oct 20, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > COPYRIGHT >The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute >under the terms of either the GNU General Public License >or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README >CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution >without the prior approval of the author. Um, what part of this copyright looks non-free to you? You can use the module under either the GPL or Artistic license, both of which are DFSG-free licenses. Ergo, it's OK to be in main, unless there's some dependency on a non-free package (which would make it appropriate for contrib). CHris -- = |Chris Lawrence |Get Debian GNU/Linux CDROMs| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>| http://www.lordsutch.com/cds/ | | | | | Debian Developer|Are you tired of politics as usual?| |http://www.debian.org/ | http://www.lp.org/| =
Re: Bug#47845: libdbd-pg-perl nonfree?
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 11:24:40PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Oct 20, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > > COPYRIGHT > >The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute > >under the terms of either the GNU General Public License > >or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README > >CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution > >without the prior approval of the author. > > Um, what part of this copyright looks non-free to you? You can use > the module under either the GPL or Artistic license, both of which are > DFSG-free licenses. YoW! A bad paste on my part. It's non-free because it prohibits distribution on CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution without the prior approval of the author. Here's the except from man DBD::Pg in its entirety: COPYRIGHT The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public License or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README file, with the exception that it cannot be placed on a CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution without the prior approval of the author. Sorry for the mess-up. -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#47845: libdbd-pg-perl nonfree?
On Oct 20, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 11:24:40PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > > On Oct 20, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > > > COPYRIGHT > > >The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute > > >under the terms of either the GNU General Public License > > >or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README > > >CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution > > >without the prior approval of the author. > > > > Um, what part of this copyright looks non-free to you? You can use > > the module under either the GPL or Artistic license, both of which are > > DFSG-free licenses. > > YoW! A bad paste on my part. It's non-free because it prohibits distribution > on CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution without the prior > approval of the author. > > Here's the except from man DBD::Pg in its entirety: > > COPYRIGHT >The DBD::Pg module is free software. You may distribute >under the terms of either the GNU General Public License >or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README >file, with the exception that it cannot be placed on a >CD-ROM or similar media for commercial distribution >without the prior approval of the author. OK, yeah, now I can see it ;-) (Having said that, I'm not sure that it's legit to make exceptions to the GPL, especially if the author used anyone else's code in the module...) Chris -- = | Chris Lawrence | Get Debian GNU/Linux CDROMs | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>| http://www.lordsutch.com/cds/ | | | | | Grad Student, Pol. Sci. | Visit the Amiga Web Directory | |University of Mississippi| http://www.cucug.org/amiga.html | =
Re: Corel's apt frontend
On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 1999 at 01:12:42PM -0700, Bruce J. Perens wrote: > > (scrawling on the screen of my Palm-Pilot) > > > > DO NOT LGPL, that would let them make the front-end non-free. Qt > > exception is fine. > > Good point, I hadn't thought of that. Is there a form of non-free they > could get away with that wouldn't force them to pay royalties to Troll > Tech, though? If not, I hardly see them creating a new, unforseen expense > for themselves at this stage. They actually did email me, so we can do something now.. I said I'd add an exclusion for QT/QPL or something - but I really don't know what a practical wording for such an exclusion would be. Could someone cook one up? Remember they are also linking to KDE libs and I'm not keen on just a blanket 'anything called QT' statement either.. Jason
Re: Corel's apt frontend
On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 1999 at 01:12:42PM -0700, Bruce J. Perens wrote: > > > (scrawling on the screen of my Palm-Pilot) > > > > > > DO NOT LGPL, that would let them make the front-end non-free. Qt > > > exception is fine. > > > > Good point, I hadn't thought of that. Is there a form of non-free they > > could get away with that wouldn't force them to pay royalties to Troll > > Tech, though? If not, I hardly see them creating a new, unforseen expense > > for themselves at this stage. > > They actually did email me, so we can do something now.. I said I'd add an > exclusion for QT/QPL or something - but I really don't know what a > practical wording for such an exclusion would be. Btw this will mean that you won't be allowed to use other people's GPL code in libapt-pkg, right ? Greg
Re: Corel's apt frontend
From: Gergely Madarasz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Btw this will mean that you won't be allowed to use other people's GPL > code in libapt-pkg, right ? No, it simply means that any contributors to the library must accept both licenses. Essentially, there is one license that is the GPL, another that says something like this: Copyright (C) 1997, 1998, 1999 Jason Gunthorpe and others. You may apply the terms of the GNU General Public License (the GPL), Version 2.0, published by the Free Software Foundation, to this program. In addition, the copyright holders relax a single restriction of the GPL: you may link this program to a version of the GUI library "libqt", published by Troll Tech (Norway), as long as: 1. The version of "libqt" is under the terms of the "Q Public License", Version 2.0, which was published by Troll Tech on or before 20-October-1999. 2. The source code of the version of "libqt" used is a) Distributed with the binary version. OR b) Downloadable by anyone, without fee, using a publicly-announced URL on the internet, for a duration of at least three years starting with distribution of the binary version.
Re: Corel's apt frontend
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Bruce Perens wrote: > From: Gergely Madarasz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Btw this will mean that you won't be allowed to use other people's GPL > > code in libapt-pkg, right ? > > No, it simply means that any contributors to the library must accept both > licenses. Essentially, there is one license that is the GPL, another that > says something like this: I understand this. The issue is that Jason can't take some GPL code and incorporate it into libapt-pkg. It is another case if some other author accepts this licence. Greg
Re: Corel's apt frontend
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 09:19:27AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote: > From: Gergely Madarasz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Btw this will mean that you won't be allowed to use other people's GPL > > code in libapt-pkg, right ? > > No, it simply means that any contributors to the library must accept both > licenses. Essentially, there is one license that is the GPL, another that > says something like this: > Don't forget the importance of allowing derivative works to omit the QT clause. Otherwise, difficulty arrises when using parts of libapt in other programs licensed only under the GPL. > Copyright (C) 1997, 1998, 1999 Jason Gunthorpe and others. You > may apply the terms of the GNU General Public License (the > GPL), Version 2.0, published by the Free Software Foundation, > to this program. > > In addition, the copyright holders relax a single restriction of > the GPL: you may link this program to a version of the GUI library > "libqt", published by Troll Tech (Norway), as long as: > > 1. The version of "libqt" is under the terms of the "Q Public License", > Version 2.0, which was published by Troll Tech on or before > 20-October-1999. > > 2. The source code of the version of "libqt" used is > > a) Distributed with the binary version. > > OR > > b) Downloadable by anyone, without fee, using a publicly-announced > URL on the internet, for a duration of at least three years > starting with distribution of the binary version. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce's DSL down
If you need bruce today use this address.
