On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 11:11:52AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > FWIW, our handling of the 3270 code doesn't seem undue caution;
i'm not sure about that. look closely at each license in the copyright file. all but one explicitly grant the right to "use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose". the one that doesn't neglects to mention "use". admittedly, i didn't spend much time on it, but at first (and even second) glance, these packages seem to be DFSG-free. > the same principle applies to angband, AIUI -- we *think* the copyright > holders no, the moria/angband/tome/zangband etc packages are different. they say "This software may be copied and distributed for educational, research, and not for profit purposes". i.e. you're not allowed to copy them for profit. > OTOH, this does point out some potentially "low-hanging fruit" in non-free -- > packages that, with a bit of effort on someone's part, might be eligible for > inclusion in main. yep. there also seemed to be a few packages where only one or two source files are under a non-DFSG license. if they could be replaced then the entire package would be truly free. > > ALMOST FREE > > ----------- > > My only comment here is that, to use this definition of "almost" free, in hindsight, using "ALMOST FREE" as the label for the 4th group was wrong. while many (maybe even most) of the packages are what i consider to be almost-free, several of them are not even close. "OTHER" or "UNCLASSIFIED" would have been more appropriate. craig -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
