From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24930 invoked from network); 7 Oct 1999 13:29:40 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Oct 1999 13:29:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 7449 invoked by alias); 7 Oct 1999 13:29:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 8160 Received: (qmail 7437 invoked from network); 7 Oct 1999 13:29:32 -0000 Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 14:29:31 +0100 From: Adam Spiers To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: bashprompt license (was Re: PATCH: prompt fun) Message-ID: <19991007142931.D19339@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mail-Followup-To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk References: <19991006215809.A12344@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: X-URL: http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/ X-OS: Linux 2.2.12 i686 Zefram (zefram@fysh.org) wrote: > Adam Spiers wrote: > >The website says nothing about copyright or licensing whatsoever. > >freshmeat reckons it's GPLed. I just mailed the list to ask. > > If the code is GPLed, it can't be used in zsh. The zsh license is > marginally inconsistent with the GPL. (It has almost the same effect > as the GPL in itself; it's just that the GPL requires redistribution > under the GPL.) Just got email from the bashprompt guy saying that there's no license on it at all and we're free to use it in any way we wish. He also said that if it made it easier for us to choose a license for it, he'd put it under that (provided it was in the spirit of free software of course).