packages under the AGPL-3 license

e and proceed. lintian reports error, E: python-configshell: copyright-should-refer-to-common-license-file-for-gpl, for which I've filed a bug report. PS: Please CC me in replies. [1] http://linux-iscsi.org/wiki/Main_Page -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs Debian - The

[A]GPL vs Apache 2

Hi, If I was to make a tool for general purpose, to help others, and ensure freedom is guaranteed, I'd go with [A]GPL. If I want to make a commercial product, I would go and opt for a proprietary license. Now I see a reason for people choosing other licenses, like Apache, is calling it being more

Re: [A]GPL vs Apache 2

derived of ASL. It turns out most people find GPL type licenses too restrictive these days. Just that who is it "restrictive" for ? But then some positive things to see too. To the best of my knowledge, one of the pressing reasons for the birth of systemd (and not, instead,  collab

Re: The future of copyleft (was: [A]GPL vs Apache 2)

Hello Ben, Thanks for titling it correct. On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 10:09 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Conversely, without the obligation written into the license > conditions > and a credible body to enforce those conditions, the chances of a > corporation voluntarily releasing their changes as free

Re: Bug#979095: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

oji/rpminfo?rpmID=23332353 Please do feel free to raise the severity, in case you do not see any progress on this bug report, over time. Thanks, Ritesh -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs Debian - The Universal Operating System signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part