Didier 'OdyX' Raboud schrieb:
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
We must not discriminate against fields of endeavor (so people
wanting to do "evil" must be able to), but this license doesn't seem
Josselin Mouette schrieb:
Definitely non-free, and the author’s clarification removes any doubt.
Hmmm... Actually... As he didn't gave a definition of "good" or "evil"
one could argue, that everything is good... for someone.
to restrict redistribution, thus making this "Good but no Evil"
software suited for non- free, no ?
Yes, but as the author didn't define his terms, you can always argue,
that whatever you do, is something good (for specific definition of
"good"), and one could argue, that this phrase is therefore no
restriction at all.
A quite philosopher way to argue, therefore:
However, I would strongly advise to not package that thing for Debian
main; it smells like problems.
Or did I misread your message ?
Depends on your definition of "read" and "message" ;) (Sorry, could not
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org