There is a package in main with the following copyright notice: Permission to use, copy, and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation.
Permission to modify the software is granted, but not the right to distribute the modified code. Modifications are to be distributed as patches to released version. This software is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty. Appended to this, in the copyright file, there is an email from the Debian maintainer asking whether it is ok for Debian to distribute this package as an .orig file plus a patch, and the answer from the author was "The above scheme is OK with me". [ The way this is currently worded, license seems Debian-specific ]. If it is not Debian-specific, it is *unreasonable* to ask the author to reword the license so that permission to distribute modified versions is allowed as long as the original is distributed as well? (For details, see Bug #35510). Thanks. -- "16aceb9385e1db9ec2f778a5cfbd76f6" (a truly random sig)
