On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:50:48PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Wed, April 6, 2005 13:08, Carlos Z.F. Liu said: > > * Package name : vimcdoc > > I misread this as "vimdoc". Wouldn't the conventions be to rather use a > name like "vimdoc-cn"? > Yeah, I admit that the name isn't very beautiful. I have two choices, vimdoc-cn and vimhelp-cn, because there is a vimhelp-fr already. :)
> > The Vimcdoc License, Version 0.1 > > Perhaps you can try to convince upstream not to invent their own licence > (which is also not free enough for main) but instead use one of the many > other licences already available (see www.opensource.org/licenses). > Preferably of course one that's DFSG-free. > Thanks. The upstream author is thinking about this issue. But I'd like to package it first, and switch it to main if he choose a free license in the future. > It might be logical to use the same licence as is used by Vim itself: so > you can be sure that if you can use Vim in some context you also can use > vimcdoc. > VIM's user manual is OPL, already non-free. http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/usr_01.html#manual-copyright -- Best Regards, Carlos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
