On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:47:52AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 11:38:29AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Hmm, it might not be DFSG OK until *after* you have renamed it.
> > Surely a Debian package is a derived product?
> If that was the case then the Apache package should also be renamed to
> something that does not contain the word apache.
Hmm. In /usr/share/doc/apache/copyright there is this clause:
5. Products derived from this software may not be called "Apache"
nor may "Apache" appear in their names without prior written
permission of the Apache Group.
This seems to be a new clause; it wasn't there the last time I
looked (which was a while ago).
The Debian package of apache is clearly a derived product -- it
has 600 kilobytes of diffs, including patches to core Apache files.
So I do think it is the case that the Apache package should be
renamed. Various alternatives:
We could get the cited "prior written permission", but if that
permission applies only to Debian then I think we run into DFSG
clause 8, "License must not be specific to Debian".
We could revert to a version of Apache that does not have this
clause.
We could start distributing Apache without modifications, but I
think that would make the package unsuitable for main. (We would
not be able to fix bugs or security problems ourselves).
Richard Braakman
