[Pkg-ace-devel] Bug#697848: NMU of ace ?

[Johnny Willemsen]

Hi,

>>> I'm more annoyed by #697848. The first two issues raised by Ansgar were
>>> not yet discussed with upstream because I need a confirmation on what
>>> is exactly the issue. If this is what I underlined in my reply then I
>>> am afraid we will have no easy solution except for moving ace to
>>> non-free.
>>
>> I am afraid I agree with Ansgar that the licence is rife with problems,
>> in particular the part where you are not allowed to remove functionality.
>> This can be read as forbidding to rip part of the source code and reuse
>> it in a different projet. Can it be DFSG-free if this is not allowed ?
>
> Agreed, but I believe Sun intent here was to ensure that
> standardization and implementation efforts (IDL to C++ and IIOP
> marshalling rules) do not get ruined by code modifications. Yes, I am
> interpreting.
>
> @Johnny: any opinion on this? See [1] for the context.

The intent of Sun is to keep IIOP mandatory in the code, but as far as I 
know we can ship the code without problems.

Johnny