On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Andrei Maslennikov wrote: > Actually, IPL itself does not admit any closed-source modifications. In > case of binary distribution, paragraph 3.iv clearly states: > > "A Contributor may choose to distribute the Program in object code > form under its own license agreement, provided that: > ... > iv) states that source code for the Program is available from such > Contributor, and informs licensees how to obtain it in a reasonable > manner on or through a medium customarily used for software > exchange". > > So probably the gatekeepers could follow the advice of Bart/Guy, > show this clause to the modutils people, and ask them to register > IPL in suggested form, as just another non-tainted case...
It's actually the kernel (include/linux/module.h) which has the master list of what's acceptable. Would someone like to volunteer to submit a patch? -D _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
