Updated: Pine-4.58-1

Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke@gnu.org
Sat Sep 27 14:32:00 GMT 2003

Eduardo Chappa writes:

> :) contains a patch in CYGWIN-PATCHES.  AFAIK, the pine license does not
> :) allow distribution of patched binaries:
>   Thank you for asking. Part of the answer to your question is in the
> archives of this mailing list.
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2002-04/msg00183.html

Ok, thanks.

> The other part of the answer was the private communication between the
> Pine team and me before I sent that message.  The bottom line of our
> communication was that there was no problem as long as I don't start
> distributing my patches (as the ones that you find in my web page, see
> below).
> One of the reasons why it took so long to release this version of Pine was
> because I talked to them about making these modifications, from where part
> of the patch came. I wanted to be sure that the new modifications were
> alright with them. They sent me the necessary modifications for Pine to
> work in Cygwin.
>   I hope this answers your question.

Yes mostly, thanks.  As I understand it, you have several patches for
pine that you cannot use to distribute binary versions of pine.  But
you are not using those for the Cygwin version.

For the Cygwin version, you are using a patch that was approved by the
pine team, and this is the patch included in CYGWIN-PATCHES.

Do I understand you correctly?

If so, all is well, but I would still have the strong request to you
to include this information along with the patch in the CYGWIN-PATCHES
directory, as it is so well known that pine has a restrictive licence.

Many packages install interesting readme files, eg the GNU GPL
licence, in /usr/doc/package/COPYING.  I would certainly expect to see
pine's restrictive CPYRIGHT licence there, as it is the only not
DFSG-free software currently in Cygwin, AFAIK.

It would be even better if you could (ask the pine team to) provide an
url that explains this exceptional situation.  Now we have to take
your word for it that all is well.  What if the pine team decides to
revoke the permission to distribute binaries that used this patch?
Did they formulate any other conditions, eg, do others besides you
also have the permission to distribute these binaries?


Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org

More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list