For either universe or multiverse, we need a clear debian/copyright that
explains what the user's rights are on the software.  Currently the
packaging declares an Apache license, but it's not clear that these are
the rights that the user has on this software; the EULA imposes other
conditions and asserts that they are binding by simply downloading or
installing the package.  So what are the effective license terms of this

If an Ubuntu community developer modifies this package to remove the
code that requires EULA acceptance, is that ok from IBM's POV?  If not,
then I would say this code is not actually Apache licensed, since
removal of a EULA prompt would be a legitimate modification under the
terms of the Apache license.

You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

  [needs-packaging] [Ubuntu 18.04 FEAT] Include cxlflash package in

To manage notifications about this bug go to:

ubuntu-bugs mailing list

Reply via email to