On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 06:47:37PM +0100, James Troup wrote: > Blah, hit the wrong key in lisa. You're recommending a non-free > package (graphviz) which violates policy (2.1). Either it needs to be > a suggestion or the package belongs in contrib.
Ah yes thanks for that. When I first built the package I didn't include graphviz, but then when I came backto it laster I thought why didn't I include it, so I did. But that's why I shouldn't off. I'll fix that up ASAP. > Also the license is problematic, but unfortunately not enough to make > it clearly DFSG free. The "copyright assignment" part is enough to > make the license GPL incompatible which will become a problem if > mobilemesh ever tries to link to a GPLed library. It might be nice to > try and convince upstream to take that part out of the license > agreement. On my fifth reading of the licence I don't think the "copyright assignment" is actually an issue, but I did initially: 3.The Mobile Mesh software is covered by the GNU General Public License (Version 2). If you transmit source code improvements or modifications to MITRE, you agree to assign to MITRE copyright to such improvements or modifications, which MITRE will then make available from MITRE's web site. The licence doesn't say that source code improvements must have their copyright assigned, it just states that if you transmit source code improvements to the upstream organisation 'MITRE' then you agree to copyright assignment. My reading is that you are under no obligation to transmit sourc code improvements to the upstream organisation 'MITRE' unless you want to. Mark
