Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Tobias Frost
Am Dienstag, den 04.10.2016, 22:43 +0200 schrieb Santiago Vila: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016, Paul Wise wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > // 4. If

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > > > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments have > > > been > > > //altered in the co

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Roberto
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 08:56:22AM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments have been > //altered in the code, the modified code must be made accessible to the > //original author(s). Fails the Desert Island Test: https://wiki.

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Paul R. Tagliamonte
pabs is right. This would fail On Oct 4, 2016 9:45 AM, "Yaroslav Halchenko" wrote: > > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > > > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments > have been > > > //altered

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Miriam Ruiz
2016-10-04 15:55 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise : > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: >> ok -- playing devil's advocate (just a phrase, I am not of that opinion >> about the upstream ;)) -- nothing there states about connectivity >> (Internet) or media (digitized, printed) how they mus

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016, Paul Wise wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > >> > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments have >> > been >> > //altered in the code, the modified code

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
On Tue, 04 Oct 2016, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments have > > been > > //altered in the code, the modified code must be made accessible to the > > //original author(s).

Re: would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > // 4. If anything other than configuration, indentation or comments have been > //altered in the code, the modified code must be made accessible to the > //original author(s). This is impossible to comply with for those who do no

would this custom license considered DFSG-free/GPL-compatible

2016-10-04 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
Dear Debian IANALs, Would you consider this short custom license DFSG-free and compatible for reuse/integration within projects under more permissive (MIT/BSD) or copyleft licenses such as GPL. (do not want to burden/prime you with my analysis). // This software is published under the terms of K