On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:39:43PM -0700, Walter Landry wrote: > However, you said that the author is resposive. At a minimum, I think > that the paragraph > > > The tool set can be distributed as part of other non-commercial program > > packages, but only in its original, unadapted form. If anybody is > > interested in providing the tools as integrated part of another > > package, this must be negotiated. > > has to go. I don't think that special permission for Debian will > work.
A requirement for special permission for Debian is ok in non-free, if that special permission has been granted. > Also, the phrase > > > You may adapt the functionality of the program to your local needs, > > but you are forbidden to redistribute copies of the files comprising > > the software which were altered in any respect. If you add a > > valuable feature, or hunt down a bug, you are welcome to contact the > > author by email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and the fix or feature > > will be most certainly integrated into the one and only official > > release. > > is worrisome, since that means that any security problems or serious > bugs will kick it out of Debian, even if the fix is trivial. This is > even more pressing since you said that the project has mostly stalled. This means that if there's a security problem or a "damages the user's system" problem we'll have to replace the insecure package with an empty package with a note explaining the conflict introduced by the license. [The empty package obviously won't have the security problem, and obviously won't contain any material which we're not prohibitted from distributing.] All in all, this doesn't sound like a great situation, but if enough people value it, maybe it's worth putting some effort into it... -- Raul
