bug1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> quotes an email from an upstream author > There is no license requirement. The only thing that Iozone requires > is that the code maintain the information about the authors and > contributors. Yep, it is free and may be re-distributed for > free. The copyright is intended to prevent someone from creating a > commercial package by just taking the code and then selling it.
This is not completely self-consistent. First, "the only" requirement is that the author is credited. That is fine, but then he goes on to say that he wants to prevent commercial redistribution. For the license to be DFSG-free it has to allow redistribution for free *as well as* redistribution for money. > I would love to see it become distributed with debian, Redhat, Suse, > as well as other Unix variants. And, to be DFSG-free, he would have to at least tolerate that someone ports his software to Windows or other non-unices. -- Henning Makholm "Vend dig ikke om! Det er et meget ubehageligt syn!"
