On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 21:54 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 15:20 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > > >>> It looks quite free apart from the "as long as ... you do not ... try to > >>> sell it" clause, which I think disqualifies it as free software despite > >>> what the first sentence of the license terms states. Is this OK for > >>> Extras or not? > >> I don't think so. > > > > That counts as a use-restriction license. I say no. > > > > (See if you can get the author to remove the "as long as you do not try > > to sell it" clause) > > > > Exactly many authors unfortunatly come up with their own license, as a > games SIG member I've got plenty of experience with those. Usually if > the license already is 99.9% free a polite mail (exchange) is all it > will take to get a 100% free license. OTOH if the license is restrictive > (which this one isn't) your chances of changing the author's mind are > less good. Let's see what happens. http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=19256 Paul. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
