[pkg-eucalyptus-maintainers] mule_2.0.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Charles Plessy]

Le Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:58:24AM +0000, Torsten Werner a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> the variant of CPAL 1.0 used by mulesoft requires a splashscreen for GUI
> programs in Exhibit B which is considered non-free. Just think about a modern
> KDE desktop with many shiny plasma widgets: every widget that includes a bit of
> code from mulesoft would be forced to display a splash screen. The desktop
> would become unusable and that is why we consider such clauses as an unfair
> restriction.  Please see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/09/msg00149.html for the discussion.
> You may contact upstream and ask for a CPAL variant without the splashscreen
> requirement.
> 
> "Redistributions of the Covered Code in binary form or source code form, must
>  ensure that the first time the resulting executable program is launched, a user
>  interface, if any, shall include the attribution information set forth below
>  prominently."

Hi Torsten,

according to the term 14 of the license, if the graphical user interface has an
“about“ display, then the requrement for notifying the attribution information
is satisfied.

‘If the Original Code displays such
 Attribution Information in a particular form (such as in the form of a splash
 screen, notice at login, an "about" display, or dedicated attribution area on
 user interface screens), continued use of such form for that Attribution
 Information is one way of meeting this requirement for notice.’

Although I do not like this clause, it makes it no less annoying that the
advertisement clauses, and those are tolerated in our archive.

If you agree with the above interpretation, would you reconsider your decision?

Have a nice week-end,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan