Hi Jari That's great to hear! Its hard to get the University to change anything since it has to go through approval processes.
agrep was originally written by Udi Manber and colleagues at the University of Arizona and was licensed through their Office of Technology Transfer. Tom Gries has been distributing agrep, which I'm pretty sure is covered by the same license I licensed Webglimpse and Glimpse originally for commercial sale, and then I negotiated with the UofA to release all three programs as open source, which resulted in the https://github.com/gvelez17/webglimpse and https://github.com/gvelez17/glimpse repos. Thomas said he updated the agrep license, is it not the same? https://github.com/Wikinaut/agrep/blob/master/COPYRIGHT You can contact him at [email protected] for any questions about the Wikinaut archive. Thx --Golda On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Jari Aalto <[email protected]> wrote: > > Summary: response from Debian Legal mailing lista was > affirmative in favor of ISC License being DSFG free. This > means that agrep versions with this license could move from > non-free to main. > > * 2016-10-21 Ben Finney <[email protected]> wrote in > * https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2016/10/msg00029.html > > (...) > http://webglimpse.net/sublicensing/licensing.html > All required DFSG freedoms are granted by this text. > > The conditions do not impose any non-free restrictions. > > By my reading, the grant and conditions are exactly equivalent to the > well-understood Expat license grant and conditions. > > This work, provided its complete license grant and conditions was only > the above text, would IMO be uncontroversially DFSG-free. > > Golda and Wikinaut: Now the question[1] about the sources > remain. Could you clarify how the sources are related and > how the development is being handled. This will help to > decide proper packaging workflow for Debian. > > Jari > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827902#10 >
