On 06/20/2016 08:11 AM, Guillem Jover wrote: > Hi! > > On Sun, 2016-06-19 at 23:44:50 +0800, ChangZhuo Chen wrote: >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> Owner: "ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬)" <czc...@debian.org> > >> * Package name : pacapt >> Version : 2.3.8 >> Upstream Author : Anh K. Huynh >> * URL : https://github.com/icy/pacapt >> * License : Fair > > That license is pretty much non-free, as it does not allow > modification nor redistribution, only using the code.
Well, according to https://opensource.org/licenses/fair http://fairlicense.org/ it's OSI-approved and there apparently has been a discussion on debian-legal that deems it DFSG-free. I get your point, to me a plain reading of this license seems to indicate that modification or redistribution is not allowed, but apparently in legal terms it does allow for that. So deferring to debian-legal and OSI I'll consider it to be a free software license, but I do think that the Fair license is an epic fail when you measure it up against its goal of having a license that's even simpler than BSD/MIT, because its primary effect is to confuse people. (Shorter is not always simpler.) Regards, Christian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
