[pkg-x2go-devel] Bug#784565: Bug#784565: Bug#784565: nx-libs-lite: parts are derived from non-free code

[Mike Gabriel]

Hi Kevin, hi Zach, hi Francesco, hi all,

@Francesco, please review the recent posts and sum up what to do next.

----- Original message -----
> By the way, poking around the interwebs I find there is an archive of
> the old DXPC mailing list available at:
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=dxpc&r=1&w=2
> 
> I think you will find this of particular interest:
> 
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=dxpc&m=93093790813555&w=2


> 
> 
> List:             dxpc
> Subject:       Re: future tecnologies
> From:             Brian Pane <brianp () cnet ! com>
> Date:             1999-07-02 16:42:18
> [Download message RAW]
> 
> Kevin Vigor <kvigor at eng.ascend.com> wrote:
> > On 01-Jul-99 dxpc at mcfeeley.cc.utexas.edu wrote:
> > > Speaking of licensing, are you putting your 3.8.0 changes to the dxpc
> > > code itself under GPL, or are they going to use the original dxpc's
> > > licensing?
> > 
> > No, as you can probably guess, I am no fan of the GPL. For stuff on
> > this level, where my hacking is pretty simple and probably devoid of
> > commercial value, I'll just release my changes to the public domain and
> > give up even a copyright interest in them.
> > 
> > Your and Zach's copyrights still stand, of course.
> > 
> > I *think* that fact that we use the LZO library and API, but do not
> > directly incorporate the code, allows us to escape the clutch of the
> > GPL virus.
> > 
> > btw, is there an original dxpc license? I haven't seen anything but a
> > copyright notice, which to my non-lawyerly mind translates as "free to
> > all the world as is, negotiate with copyright owner if modifying or
> > including in some other product".
> 
> The copyright banner in the Readme is all the documentation there's ever
> been.   My intent was to allow _any_ distribution, use, and modification
> of the source, without imposing restrictions on the licensing style of
> any system into which others might incorporate the code.   We probably
> should start stating this clearly in the distributions.
> 
> -brian
> 
> [prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]

@Kevin: You are very awesome!

@Francesco: that old post from Brian should be the statement we need, right? As Brian has not answered back, so far, does that post suffice?

I also had a mail from Zach in my mailbox this morning. I managed to get hold of him via phone over the weekend. He posted his agreement to this Debian bug (as message #77) [1] earlier today. @Zach: thanks a lot for that!!!

@Francesco: by looking at [2], I cannot see any hint for Gian Filippo Pinzari being a copyright holder of DXPC. This is stated in the NoMachine files at at least one place, but not in the latest DXPC upstream release. I am on my mobile right now, need to check old versions of DXPC, but if Gian Filippo Pinzari is not listed in the DXPC 3.7.0 release (where nxcomp obviously got forked from), then I think that we don't require his feedback, right?

To my opinion, this issue can be settled. We have direct feedback from Kevin and Zach and Kevin dug out an old post from Brian stating the retroactive nature of the BSD-2-clause while Gian Filippo probably not being a real copyright holder of the original DXPC code. Right?

light+love,
Mike

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=77;att=0;bug=784565
[2] http://www.vigor.nu/dxpc/README


-- 

DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
mike gabriel, herweg 7, 24357 fleckeby
fon: +49 (1520) 1976148

GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B13
mail: mike.gabriel at das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de