From: "Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn" <chithanh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Clarify the "as-is" license?
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 21:27:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50674B9E.4020402@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20577.36806.994687.73943@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
Ulrich Mueller schrieb:
> I've created licenses/HPND [1] now, and added it to the @OSI-APPROVED
> group. So packages whose license matches this template can be changed
> from as-is to HPND. (And please, _only_ OSD-compliant packages.
> We don't want the same mess again, as we have with as-is.)
I have one question: The license can be GPL-compatible but the software
itself non-free. So binary-only packages distributed under e.g. BSD
license should remain BSD or not?
If we start to measure the software freedom of the code inside the
package, then maybe LICENSE is the wrong variable to express this.
Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-29 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-23 10:56 [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license? Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-23 11:15 ` Rich Freeman
2012-09-23 12:04 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-23 12:10 ` hasufell
2012-09-23 21:37 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-24 0:36 ` Rich Freeman
2012-09-24 7:02 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-24 10:46 ` Rich Freeman
2012-09-24 13:15 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-24 13:20 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-09-24 2:10 ` Alexandre Rostovtsev
2012-09-24 13:01 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-09-24 13:15 ` Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
2012-09-24 13:25 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-09-24 13:48 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-29 19:27 ` Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
2012-09-25 11:04 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-25 15:30 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2012-09-25 18:12 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-25 15:55 ` Alexandre Rostovtsev
2012-09-25 17:14 ` Rich Freeman
2012-09-29 19:27 ` Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn [this message]
2012-09-29 21:21 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-29 23:38 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-03 21:18 ` lists
2013-01-03 14:39 ` [gentoo-dev] Packages without source code (was: Clarify the "as-is" license?) Ulrich Mueller
2013-01-03 15:40 ` Rich Freeman
2013-01-03 22:58 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2014-04-23 9:39 ` [gentoo-dev] Packages without source code Ulrich Mueller
2012-10-06 14:14 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: Clarify the "as-is" license? Ulrich Mueller
2012-10-06 15:24 ` Duncan
2012-11-01 10:12 ` Ulrich Mueller
2014-05-19 8:57 ` [gentoo-dev] Removal of the as-is (so-called) license Ulrich Mueller
2014-05-19 9:08 ` Alexander Berntsen
2014-05-19 18:58 ` hasufell
2014-05-25 14:40 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ulrich Mueller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50674B9E.4020402@gentoo.org \
--to=chithanh@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox