On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 10:01:55PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > > It isn't. But the DFSG don't state that every bit of a package must be > > modifiable, either. I take it that every functional part must be > > modifyable at least.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 05:21:41PM -0500, David Starner wrote: > "(3) The license must allow modifications and derived works . . ." > No qualifications on modifications here. 4 is the patch clause, which > makes no qualifactions on what can be modified, just how, except for > name or version changes. It doesn't let you restrict what can be > modified, and it only applies to source code. On the other hand, licenses themselves are not subject to being licensed, thus DFSG requirements don't refer to the bogus concept of a license about a license. -- Raul
