-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dennis Schridde wrote:
> Ok, I hope I got the general idea. Object if you see problems.
What I write should be considered as my opinion, and not as something
100% official.
> 1. Write a LICENSE.TXT where is stated that the sourcecode (everything but
> data/) is GPL
In Free software universe it is common practice to include licensing
information in COPYING file. Including both may confuse people.
> 2. Write there also that the data is distributed under the GPL and we are not
> the copyright holders, but are coordinating with them "to ensure
> continued availability under the GPL"
> 3. Supply the original readme.txt and reference it in the LICENSE.TXT
I suggest separating the data (it is a good idea no mater if they are
GPL or not) and including a COPYING file saying something like this:
- ------
The content of this package was originally released under the following
terms:
Text from the original "readme.txt" here.
Explanation that the licensing terms are unclear, and that the data is
assumed to be released under the GPL, until it can be clarified.
Text of GPL license here.
- ------
> 4. Wait if Frank/Virgil/Rman can make Mr. McLean say something
As much as I hate the current status, that may take forever, so waiting
doing nothing is not an option, in my opinion.
> 5. Else write Eidos a mail
Yes.
What you should do is:
1. Write a letter (on paper) stating that the data files are
being distributed under the GPL.
2. Include a paragraph saying that no reply within a month
(or so) will be considered as a permission. (the legal
status of this is rather funny, but oh well)
3. Scan it and publish it online. Also make a paper photocopy
for yourself.
4. Send it to all involved parties (Eidos, Pumpkin etc.).
5. Continue development of Warzone 2100.
6. If there _is_ a reply, well... do whatever it says.
> 1: Shouldn't this LICENSE.TXT be part of the current COPYING file? Or should
> we really split that into a GPL file, a ORIGINAL_README and a LICENSE file?
As I have already mentioned:
Source package - only GPL text inside COPYING file.
Data package - GPL and original readme.txt inside COPYING file.
As for the Debian packages, if the data and source packages are
separated in a way they can be built separately, we could distribute
them in separate sections of the archive by including the data in
"non-free". Of course, if that is fine with you.
There is no need for an installer, because the data is at least
distributable, which is implied by "as is", no matter how you look at
it. Whether it can be modified is a totally different issue.
Regards,
Linas
P.S. I noticed that Per Inge Mathisen already replied while I was
writing this message, so please consider this message as an addition to
what he said.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFJ5L8ztOe9mov/y4RArVpAJ9gftcMfKSEGoJqar0qc0L3lVFoLACgzYdf
YMaerGnDczrmRZrOhp4AarI=
=QWgf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Warzone-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
