"Sean 'Shaleh' Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Z> On 11-Dec-2001 David Coe wrote: > > Upstream ispell 3.2.x has made the following change in its copyright > > (compared to 3.1.20, which we currently distribute). > > > > This sounds nonfree to me; am I wrong? If he were to change that > > "must" to a "should," would it then be DFSG-compliant? If not, what > > changes would you suggest? > > > > nah, this is just a stronger version of the apache advert clause it seems. > Debian is exempt as are most people who would actually use and ship ispell > (word processors, mail clients, etc).
Agreed. However, it does of course keep it GPL-incomptable (for the same reasons as the noxious BSD advertising clause).
