Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 10:24:38PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote: > > > I'm ITP'ing PDFlib which has an "Aladdin Free Public License". The > > full text is available from > > > http://www.pdflib.com/pdflib/aladdin-license.pdf > > > which in short and non-legal terms comes down to > > > - you may develop free software with PDFlib, provided you make all of your > > own source code publicly available > > - you may develop software for your own use with PDFlib as long as you > > don't > > sell it > > - you may redistribute PDFlib non-commercially > > - you may redistribute PDFlib on digital media for a fee if the complete > > contents of the media are freely redistributable. > > > I'm not so sure about the last two items. They smell like non-free to me. > > > I also intend to package the Perl module PDFlib (Debian poackage will be > > called 'libpdflib-perl') which has the same license as Perl itself. This > > one has to go in contrib if PDFlib goes in non-free. > > > The module Apache::AxKit::Language::AxPoint of the AxKit package and Perl > > module XML::Handler::AxPoint are dependent on that Perl module. Am I right > > in thinking these latter two also have to go in contrib then? > > I'm familiar with its license terms because we use it at work -- PDFLib > is definitely non-free. Even point 2 of the license (you may develop.. > as long as you don't sell it) violates the DFSG. > > Steve Langasek > postmodern programmer
Ah, of course. You're right. Well, non-free it is. Thanks, Ardo -- Ardo van Rangelrooij home email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] home page: http://people.debian.org/~ardo GnuPG fp: 3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73 7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
