On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Curtis Hovey <curtis.hovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Hello, I recently had to shut down my PPA due to licensing issues (my >> > attmepts to comply with upstream license in particularities ended up not >> > complying with the LP PPA Terms of Use), I have since discussed with >> > upstream and have agreed on redistribution terms which should be more >> > compatible with the ToU. >> > >> > In effect, as a whole, this game is freeware, and I will likewise distribute >> > my packaging work as freeware, no modification allowed. >> >> Thanks for making efforts to fit in with PPA terms of use. As I >> recall, the problem previously was that the developer had insisted you >> be the only person who could redistribute the game. >> >> If the game is now freely distributable, then it is okay by the PPA >> terms of use. >> >> The terms say this: >> >> "any content you upload to PPAs must be freely redistributable by Canonical, >> and released under a license permitting redistribution free of charge." >> >> > Will this be sufficient to comply with the PPA ToU? >> >> Yes, I believe that fits the requirements of the PPA terms of use. >> It'd be good to post a statement from the developer, or something >> similar, in the PPA description. I think you did something similar >> before. > > I think this is a mistake. I think not think the package meets the > criteria defined in http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines or > http://opensource.org/docs/osd > > I must be able to get the source and be permitted to modify it. Not according to the PPA Terms of Use : perhaps they are wrong and should be altered. But as they *stand*, no, thats not a requirement. -Rob
This is the launchpad-users mailing list archive — see also the general help for Launchpad.net mailing lists.
(Formatted by MHonArc.)