From: Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are you going to also cease immediately distributing all of the
important software released under the Artistic License
This appears to be a red herring. The Artistic License policy on
modifications does not seem to be much different from the GPL's.
Among
Jim Pick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Debian is getting more consistent on this all of the time.
Obviously, we weren't too consistent when ncurses got into the
distribution, with a license that doesn't permit modifications. It
looks like it was introduced very early in the history of Debian, so
Eric then rightly pointed out that the way it is written, it *does*
permit the redistribution of packages that do not allow modification
of source---that is, in fact, the very first item. To wit:
1. The software may be redistributed by anyone. The license may
restrict a source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 3 Jun 1997, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
1. The software may be redistributed by anyone. The license may
restrict a source file from being distributed in modified form,
as long as it allows modified binary files, and files that are
Jim Pick:
dselect (our package selection tool) will have to be rewritten to use
some other library. This will probably take some time, though. I'm
not sure how we will resolve having the core of our packaging system
dependent on a non-free package. Maybe we're going to have to
strip
Message from Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 6-3-97:
Jim Pick:
dselect (our package selection tool) will have to be rewritten to use
some other library. This will probably take some time, though. I'm
not sure how we will resolve having the core of our packaging system
dependent on a
Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
ESR has, IMHO, decided to start a pissing match about ncurses
development. I have no desire to participate or watch.
Mr. Dorman's opinion is understandable but mistaken.
The senior maintainers and copyright holders of ncurses (Zeyd benHalim
and myself) both feel very
Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
ESR has, IMHO, decided to start a pissing match about ncurses
development. I have no desire to participate or watch.
Mr. Dorman's opinion is understandable but mistaken.
Although I feel a deep and abiding disgust at Mr.
The senior maintainers and copyright holders of ncurses (Zeyd benHalim
and myself) both feel very strongly that Thomas Dickey hijacked the
project in a way that was unethical, injurious to the interests of
the free-software community, and arguably flat-out illegal under our
license terms.
I just wrote:
In addition, all of the programs
compiled against it should be moved out of the main distribution,
and into contrib.
(I just noticed that dselect/dpkg falls into this category)
This is not a good situation.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpPwqLOmli3A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
: And you have, I believe, stated that you are unwilling to see ncurses
: released with a license that guarantees redistribution or modified
: versions at this time.
: How do we resolve this issue?
A. Find an curses library that works. Ncurses not only has a licence problem
but as far as I can
Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
ESR has, IMHO, decided to start a pissing match about ncurses
development. I have no desire to participate or watch.
Mr. Dorman's opinion is understandable but mistaken.
Although I feel a deep and abiding disgust at
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
I don't yet know. I believe Debian's position on this is (a)
unreasonable, and (b) not even internally consistent. Are you going
to also cease immediately distributing all of the important software
released under the Artistic License and similar ones?
I don't think
13 matches
Mail list logo
