OK, let's make this simple. The Debian project has permission to distribute spim and xspim.
I'm planning on changing the license in the next release -- but not GPL, probably BSD or MIT. Is this sufficient? /Jim James Larus [email protected] Cloud Computing Futures • Microsoft Research http://research.microsoft.com/~larus 425-706-2981 -----Original Message----- From: Ben Finney [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 3:20 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Mackenzie Morgan; Jim Larus Subject: Re: RFS: spim Ben Finney <[email protected]> writes: > Far better than a separate statement in email, the full license terms > should simply be updated in a new release of the work. That way, every > recipient has access to the full terms under which they can act. > > Then the new license terms can be discussed as a whole here on > ‘debian-legal’ to see what problems remain. That's poorly phrased. While I did mean to imply that both the above should happen, there is no necessary sequence to them. That is, discussing a new set of license terms doesn't require that the release has yet happened. > Choosing a well-understood, widely-known free-software license (e.g. > GNU GPL or Expat terms) would make this much simpler, of course. Meaning that it would make the discussion much quicker, and simpler to get the work into Debian. -- \ “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more | `\ robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument | _o__) than others.” —Douglas Adams | Ben Finney <[email protected]>
