Henning Makholm wrote:
> Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 2. Modified object or executable code must be accompanied by the
> >modified source code and/or documentation clearly stating the
> >modifications. Modified executables must be renamed to not
> >conflict with
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. Modified object or executable code must be accompanied by the
>modified source code and/or documentation clearly stating the
>modifications. Modified executables must be renamed to not
>conflict with the standard names.
> The last sen
On Sat, Jun 05, 1999 at 02:37:53AM +0200, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
>
> 1. Free Redistribution
>
> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
> selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate
> software distribution containing programs fro
Has someone talked with the author of this license? If you want me to do
so, I'd help.
Bruce
Jurgen,
Read http://perens.com/OSD.html . It includes an annotated OSD that makes
some of these issues more understandable. The article is GPL-ed.
Bruce
cost, duplication charges, time of people involved,
and so on. (You will not be required to justify it to the
Copyright Holder, but only to the computing community at large
as a market that must bear the fee.)
The sentence in parentheses makes clause 5 meaningless.
The bz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Another lesson learned, thanks for all the corrections... (I'm pretty
sure I haven't seen all of them).
I really should have read the DFSG a *little* more carefully. For
anybody who missed it like me, here's the clause that I *thought*
makes bzflag n
> 3. A reasonable fee may be charged to copy this software. Any fee
> may be charged to support this software. This software may be
> distributed as part of a larger (possibly commercial) software
> distribution provided that no claim of ownership of this software
> is made.
"Juergen A. Erhard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
There's a clause you seem to have overlooked, that I think makes it
non-free (sorry):
3. A reasonable fee may be charged to copy this software. Any fee
may be charged to support this software. This software may be
distri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There's a clause you seem to have overlooked, that I think makes it
non-free (sorry):
3. A reasonable fee may be charged to copy this software. Any fee
may be charged to support this software. This software may be
distributed as part of
On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 11:49:33AM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 11:37:04 +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > 3. Redistribution and use of modified source and binary forms are
> >permitted provided that at least one of the following conditions are met:
> >
> > A. Modifi
On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 11:49:33 +0200, J.H.M. Dassen wrote:
> > B. Use of the modified version is restricted to within
> > the corporation or organization that made the modifications.
>
> This violates DFSG #1/#3: the modified version cannot be redistributed
> freely. Or if you will #5: it
On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 11:37:04 +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> 3. Redistribution and use of modified source and binary forms are
>permitted provided that at least one of the following conditions are met:
>
> A. Modifications are placed in the public domain or are
> made available un
Hello, ...
I am thinking about packaging bzflags (http://groundhog.pair.com/bzflag), and
would want ot know what you think about the license
(http://groundhog.pair.com/bzflag/license.html), it is claimed to be
opensource (as per www.opensource.org) but the following clause seems suspect
to me :
3
14 matches
Mail list logo
