[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: No more ports of unfree software
On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 04:27:35PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>I wouldn't cite from djb pages - Theo seems to dislike him (and for example
>daemontools is a port which is eligible to _exist_ in the base ports tree,
>just with PERMIT_*=No - for djbdns, PERMIT_DISTFILES_FTP=Yes is even pos-
>sible). Theo likes to play a politician here.
AFAIK, djb is quite inconsistent in his statements about licensing
of his software. While I haven't checked daemontools or djbdns,
I could understand that differentiation.
My personal experience is from cdb-0.75, where I couldn't find
out what license to apply (it's not for ports, but I occasionally
check the license of some 3rd party packages used in the company here).
A few files are marked "public domain", the rest of the files w/o any
copyright/license marks. On the web page just "You may distribute
unmodified copies of the cdb package". Nothing about usage, local
modification w/o distribution, compilation, etc.