Andreas Enge <[email protected]> skribis: > Am Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2013 schrieb Mark H Weaver: >> Anyway, in the case of w3m, there are quite a variety of licenses used: >> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/w/w3m/w3m_0.5.3-8/w3m.c >> opyright > > It looks like essentially, a w3m license is used, with a little bit of X11 > interspersed for minor files. In this case, we usually put the main license > into the corresponding package field with a guile comment concerning the > other files.
Yes, agreed. It’s true that we don’t keep a detailed list of files and associated copyright like Debian does. > Even more so, the content (if not the wording) of this w3m license is > essentially X11. So maybe we need a license x11-style, modelled on bsd- > style? I think so. > Additionally, the file matrix.c looks non-free to me: > "3. No charge is made for this software or works derived from it. > This clause shall not be construed as constraining other software > distributed on the same medium as this software, nor is a > distribution fee considered a charge." > > So maybe it needs to be patched out, if possible? How come debian contains > the file? It’s not in http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Software_blacklist so I guess it’s a question for the gnu-linux-libre mailing list. Any volunteer? :-) Thanks, Ludo’.
