Hello, > On May 14, 2016, at 9:45 PM, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In particular, some software is "GPLv2 only" while others are "GPLv2 > (or later)" or even "GPLv2 (only) or GPLv3 (only)”. I did not go into that fine of detail. But, someone should do that someday. > [It's a mess.] Very much so. Some are technically multiple licenses and really should be listed as such. For example: Some, maybe CLAMAV (Maybe not, I did just go hundreds of packages) that contains sources that range from GPLv2, LGPL 2.1, BSD, MIT….. > >> Anyhow, these are the problem packages and their probable destinies. >> >> ARCHIVER: >> >> ZOO - Includes sources, may be Public Domain. No License information. >> Dropped. > > I already pointed you to Debian. Or just use older 2.01 if that > worried. Or just use BOOZ, at least it can decompress. But hey, it's > fairly obscure at this point, so I doubt most people even want it or > know what it is. > >> BASE: >> >> No issues. > > Really? Did you double-check JEMM (JLOAD.EXE + *.JLM) and CuteMouse > (COM2EXE.EXE)???? I did not evaluate every single file in each package. What I did was, locate and determine the license the package says it is released under (NOT the LSM DATA). If not present, searched all other readme, help and text documents. Then primary executable sources and program resource data files. Finally, if it could not be determined, some quick web searching. Without going into details, my free time gets more and more limited as we move into summer. So, I am not going to evaluate or bring into compliance individual files or packages. I can either drop non-compliant packages. Or, I can replace them with compliant versions. I’m not trying to be a jerk. I just don’t have the spare time to devote to that level of detail on those kind of issues. > [..] >> UIDE - Free for non-commercial, Removed. > > Uh, no. AFAIK, none of his variations were ever "non-commercial only" > (which would neither be "open source" [OSI] nor "Free" [FSF]). You are correct. It is just freely distributable. I must have some moved into a different package when I was looking at the UIDE licensing. Oh well, it happens. But, regardless of its licensing it was slated for removal. > " > XMGR, RDISK, and UIDE are offered at no cost, "as is", "use at your own > risk", and with NO warranties, not even the implied warranty of FITNESS > for any particular purpose nor of MERCHANTABILITY! > " > > However, AFAIK, Jim (still) seems to think it would be better > (overall) if we removed these. I don't personally know of any concrete > legal reason to do so, only some irrational rants and behavior from > Jack himself. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
