Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > > > Clearly the license is non-free due to the requirement that modified > > versions not be distributed without the permission of the authors. My > > question is this: if I were to obtain permission from the authors for > > Debian to distribute packaged binaries of Root, would that be sufficient > > for it to go into non-free? > > Being unable to not fix security issues in a timely manner is a Bad > Thing. We should not support, endorse or otherwise support such > software. Not even in non-free (which is not part of Debian proper).
I'm not saying I disagree, but AFAICR there's already plenty of software in non-free that forbids modification... -- James
