Hi,
I already wrote to ATT only to get a negative response. It may be
usefull if you send them a polite note for the same. In view of this
impasse you may close the bug if you like. I was under the impression
that it is a seperate driver and didn't realise it was in the form
of a patch.
regards
Well right, it is a separate driver. But it is only useful if run as
part of gs, which makes them together a single work. So if we ship
them together we are in violation of license on gs, which is the GPL.
I've already contacted the ATT people as well. And received a
similarly polite but
Not clear to me that this is okay, since the code is *only* useful as
a patch to gs. If you can get a statement from the gs authors that it
is okay, that might be satisfactory. Otherwise it seems safer to just
continue to whine to ATT about how stupid they are being in licensing
a patch using a
Package: djvulibre-bin
Version: 3.5.14-2
Followup-For: Bug #249455
Hi,
gsdjvu is now under the CPL. Couldn't it be possible to
make it a seperate package (being GPL incompatible but
free according to FSF) ? Are there any such plans.
regards
b thomas
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
4 matches
Mail list logo
