Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [djb@koobera.math.uic.edu: qmail 1.00 available]

To: 'Qmail List' <qmail@list.cr.yp.to>
Subject: Re: [djb@koobera.math.uic.edu: qmail 1.00 available]
From: DAve <dave.list@pixelhammer.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:25:11 -0500
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: gmail-qmail@securepoint.com
Delivered-to: sp.com.list@gmail.com
Delivered-to: mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to
In-reply-to: <45E63DD4.8010907@graffiti.net>
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20070222151110.03804210@mail.30below.com> <3.0.6.32.20070222231359.01865900@192.168.192.1> <20070222233714.c627bfbe.sasa@admin-networks.org> <45E4C924.7080400@infostreet.com> <20070228012701.ffce04e1.sasa@admin-networks.org> <45E4D2FB.5020305@graffiti.net> <45E4D618.4030101@graffiti.net> <45E4D739.5050405@perkel.com> <45E4EBEB.5080906@graffiti.net> <34273.71.129.198.222.1172643215.squirrel@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <20070228093116.GA1771@muc.de> <45E59F88.6070905@paranacidade.org.br> <45E5A5B6.5040701@pixelhammer.com> <45E63DD4.8010907@graffiti.net>
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)
Feizhou wrote:

"Dan Bernstein (qmail's author) only gives permission for qmail to be distributed in source form, or binary for by approval. This package has been put together to allow people to easily build a qmail binary package for themselves, from source.

This package builds a binary .deb that is FHS compliant and conforms to the Debian standards guidelines. The resulting binary packages are not suitable for re-distribution. "

Yes, just like netqmail, DJB's 'license' allows for the final effect that you can get from software using 'approved licenses'. You get the modified source code and build scripts necessary to create the binaries you want without politics about proprietary extensions or what not. Plain and simple.

Very much unlike other licenses that attempt to lay on restrictions outside of copyright law.

Sorry, should have been more clear. Your point was my point, I see no problem here.

DAve

--
Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a
logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos
for other non-international holidays, but nothing for
Veterans?

Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>