[Catalog-sig] Re: [Distutils] PEP 241 draft
Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:53:08 -0700
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:45:22PM +0000, John J. Lee wrote:
>Freely-Redist. is not something everyone understands in the same way, so I
Such is life... There are a lot of things that not everyone understands in
the same way. We put a reasonable definition in the PEP, and that's what's
used as the guide for understanding it. If you think the name is bad,
I'm open to another name, but I think specifying that is useful.
To some, the "Freely-redistributable" field is more important than the
License field. The lack of such a field has constantly been painful in
CPAN. At the least, if we imply this from the License field, the PEP
should list what licenses we imply that from.
On thinking of it more, I'm thinking that another name is probably good.
"Redistributable" with a value of "yes", "no", or "unmodified". For example,
DJB's stuff is freely redistributable ONLY if it's unmodified or binaries
built from an unmodified source.
Linux: When you need to run like a greased weasel.
-- Sean Reifschneider, 1998
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <email@example.com>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python