pine RPM and IPv6 for imapd

Jef Spaleta jspaleta at princeton.edu
Tue Jan 6 22:39:35 UTC 2004


Antonio Querubin writes:

> ..."
> 
> and various typical accountability/liability conditions follow.
> To me the intent seems that it's open source and modification and
> redistribution is allowed.

thats pretty funny...that you left out the specific bits of the license
that actually matter....

Here's a question for you...is the license under which pine is
distributed OSI approved? 
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

Now i'm not suggesting that an OSI approved license is necessary for
fedora inclusion, because i don't know if thats true or not. But
maybe... exactly how the pine license works and restrictions on it are
subtle enough so that the mind-numbingly pedantic bits of the license
that you didn't cut and paste to the list are not 'typical
accountability/liability conditions' at all. I humbly submit that if the
license is not OSI approved its got some subtle strings attached that
make it problematic. I don't claim to understand those strings, and I
doubt you do either. But you know...i bet this license has come up for
OSI consideration in the past, and there is probably discussion archived
on the OSI relevant mailinglists that you can research if you care
enough to want to understand.

-jef"is perfectly happy to accept the fact that the pine license is not
OSI approved and thus not acceptable"spaleta








More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list