On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi<vmlinuz386@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
Jan de Groot wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 11:10 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
See the source code, is "old" BSD, or maybe the author forgot to
update
the license ? for example tftp/main.c uses 4-clause and uses
readline.
You think we should just remove the package? We have alternate tftp implementations, right?
No, just do not link to readline. This action will depend on how much importance is given to the licenses in Arch.
This is why the question mark in the title ;) Personally I don't care if link or not link for these issues in licenses.
I don't want to be an ass here, but shouldn't we remove openssl too?
ugh!, this is ugly.
And if we get in tight, there are conflicts between different versions of the GPL, this is ugly. To this are the lawyers, who enjoy these things, and not for us who are programmers, right?
Good Luck.
To paraphrase what Thomas said to me: This is all free software, we should be able to use free software with other free software, damnit. It seems to go against the spirit to do things like this. I like this sentiment. I mean, I get that there are zealots out there who strongly believe in their Chosen License as if it were a soccer team, but seriously - it's all free software, and we may be subtly violating the letter of the license, but the letter of the license is violating the _spirit_ of the license.