On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 01:37:37AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
Any work released under such a license can go in main, provided that
* there is no indication that the copyright holder interprets the
license in some unusual (and non-free) ways
* the work is unencumbered by actively
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:02:49 -0500 Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 01:37:37AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
Any work released under such a license can go in main, provided that
* there is no indication that the copyright holder interprets the
license in some unusual
* Piotr Roszatycki:
I think it is BSD-like license with advertising clause.
It looks more like a 3-clause BSD license, *without* the obnoxious
advertising clause.
Is it fit to the main archive?
I think so. However, IIRC, Bastian Blank is working on packaging VCP
and its dependencies.
On 2004-10-26 10:16:21 +0100 Piotr Roszatycki
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is BSD-like license with advertising clause. Is it fit to
the main
archive?
At first glance, the licence appears to be BSD-like without
advertising clause, so could go in main.
--
MJR/slefMy Opinion
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:16:21 +0200 Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
I think it is BSD-like license with advertising clause. Is it fit to
the main archive?
What you quoted is *exactly* the 3-clause BSD license, with *no* OAC
(Obnoxious Advertising Clause).
You can compare with
5 matches
Mail list logo