From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: w3m: 'license'; error: redefinition of 'struct file_handle'
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:38:02 +0100
Message-ID: <87liapbq2d.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <878v6spyx3.fsf@karetnikov.org> <87y5esk9s6.fsf@tines.lan>
	<201302131143.06301.andreas@enge.fr> <874nhfkhcl.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87liaq13h2.fsf@tines.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60426)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U6MQb-0001Ki-Qb
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:38:24 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U6MQV-0006xa-LC
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:38:17 -0500
Received: from [2a01:e0b:1:123:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:271e] (port=43533
	helo=xanadu.aquilenet.fr) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U6MQV-0006vi-FD
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:38:11 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87liaq13h2.fsf@tines.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Fri, 15
	Feb 2013 01:43:53 -0500")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:

> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes:
>
>> Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:
>>
>>> Additionally, the file matrix.c looks non-free to me:
>>> "3.  No charge is made for this software or works derived from it.=20=20
>>>       This clause shall not be construed as constraining other software
>>>       distributed on the same medium as this software, nor is a
>>>       distribution fee considered a charge."
>>>
>>> So maybe it needs to be patched out, if possible? How come debian conta=
ins=20
>>> the file?
>>
>> It=E2=80=99s not in http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Software_blacklist so I =
guess
>> it=E2=80=99s a question for the gnu-linux-libre mailing list.  Any volun=
teer?
>
> I asked RMS, and he thinks that this clause is okay because it says a
> "distribution fee" is okay and does not limit the amount.  Thus, what it
> prohibits is a fee for the right to use the program, which is okay.

Great, thanks for investigating.

> Apologies for paraphrasing RMS rather than quoting him directly, but I
> forgot to ask whether it was okay to publish what he wrote in private
> email.

In the future I think it=E2=80=99s better if we work with the gnu-linux-lib=
re
list, where there are knowledgeable people lurking (from gNewSense,
Trisquel, etc.), as it would allow us to share efforts with them (and
vice versa ;-)).

Thanks!

Ludo=E2=80=99.