On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 4:03 PM Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> wrote: > > >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Fontana <rfont...@redhat.com> writes: > > Richard> I'm curious if there are opinions on why "must retain the > Richard> above copyright notice immediately at the beginning of the > Richard> file" is consistent with the DFSG. This is one of a variety > Richard> of 1990s FreeBSD 3-clause BSD variants with such a feature. > > Well, under DFSG 4, the license could have required that no > modifications be made to the source file at all: > > > 4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code > > The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in > > modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch > > files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the > > program at build time. The license must explicitly permit > > distribution of software built from modified source code. The > > license may require derived works to carry a different name or > > version number from the original software. (This is a compromise. > > The Debian group encourages all authors not to restrict any files, > > source or binary, from being modified.) > > So, it would be DFSG compatible if the license required an unmodified > file be distributed that was patched at build time. > This is clearly a lot better than that, and appears to grant our users > the same freedoms as would be the case if DFSG 4 were needed.
Ah, good point. I had forgotten about this. Richard