-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
> I understand that debian cannot distribute these packages in binary format > as part of its distribution. I believe that this is because debian is a > legal organization who's policy is not to distribute non-GPL software. Debian has no policy against non-GPL software. Apache is part of the Debian distro, and it is not GPLed. Perl is not GPLed. There are many standard debian packages that are not GPLed. > "Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by mutual > agreement: > (a) In free-of-charge or at-cost distributions by non-profit concerns; > (b) In free-of-charge distributions by for-profit concerns; > (c) Inclusion in a CD-ROM collection of free-of-charge, shareware, or > non-proprietary software for which a fee may be charged for the > packaged distribution." I don't see any mention of redistribution of binaries here. Read the following segment from the Pine license: - --- Although the above trademark and copyright restrictions do not convey the right to redistribute derivative works, the University of Washington encourages unrestricted distribution of patch files which can be applied to the University of Washington Pine distribution. If this software is modified for local use, please denote this on all modified versions of the software by appending the letter "L" to the current version number and by enumerating the changes in the release notes and associated documentation. - --- You can't re-distribute dirivative works. That's key because an official Debian package would require a slightly modified binary in order to comply with the Debian filesystem guidelines. You can modify it for LOCAL USE, in which case you need to append L to the version number. Making something available for download on the internet hardly constitues local use. However, since your Pine package has not been patched, you're operating within the license. I am just giving you the reasons why Debian can't distribute it. George Bonser stated on this list that it is possible to have the University of Washington approve a modified binary release, and that could work for you, if you wanted to make your Pine binary comply with the debian filesystem standards and still remain legal. But Debian can't make that a part of the actual distribution because it violates the Debian Free Software Guidelines. I don't remember why it was removed from the non-free section, though a reason was given at the time. noah PGP public key available at http://lynx.dac.neu.edu/home/httpd/n/nmeyerha/mail.html or by 'finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED]' This message was composed in a 100% Microsoft free environment. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNtSzC4dCcpBjGWoFAQGb0QP+PDL9kFIEymfJNNW/doI+kq5okIjO0QAp VwnyvVRwsf0hX6qbfT+r6ROndhtnrneEVxaedjo7xRKPTnM8+6aFLjG0kN6Peqrl rHG4P6VW7Ha2y8T6iaTPdP+fu7gnfg20XFXen1iXJQSdPS4H13VGQRq2aIs5zlZt JViZrpVA+AY= =Vdii -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
