[GRASS5] v.in.dwg license problem

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Sat, May 17, 2003 at 10:21:07PM +1200, H Bowman wrote:
> > I do not understand what the big difficulty would be to put
> > modules such as v.in.dwg in a special modules / special page (such as
> > http://grass.itc.it/grass_addons.html).

I suggest a page name clearly making a difference between
addons that can completely operate with Free Software
and "contrib" ones, that cannot.

> As mentioned, we have 
> http://freegis.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/grass/src.nonGPL/
> and
> http://freegis.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/grass/src.contrib/
> 
> why not have 
> http://freegis.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/grass51/src.nonGPL/
> or
> http://freegis.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/grass51/src.contrib/
> 
> as well?

The reason for 5.0 src.nonGPL was that when Markus and I started
the bigger license cleanup, we used something labeled "nonGPL" as
a container to put anything in that might give us a licensing problem.
We did not have a well defined separation, it was more a license
problem bag.

A more precise labeling we could use in the future 
would be "non-free" and "contrib".
With "contrib" being Free Software packages that depend
on proprietory software (ala non-free) to work.
Radim: Please note that this is sensible even 
even when GRASS' libraries were under a more permissive license.

Note that many non-free packages don't come with source
that you could provide, thus for "non-free" a normal 
directory on a server might just serve the purpose.

	Bernhard
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20030517/4b1090ed/attachment.bin