Re: SEUL: Mailers and freeness

[Donovan Rebbechi <elflord@pegasus.rutgers.edu>]

> 
> As for pine, I haven't looked at the license, but since it's in non-free 
> under Debian, I'm assuming someone else has and it's been deemed 'not free 
> enough'.  That doesn't mean we can't include it, that just means we can't 
> include it in the basic distribution.  We'll do like Debian (and RedHat, 
> for that matter) and have a non-free directory that distributors (CD 
> burners, etc.) can include, but they have to check with the licensors first.
> 

 Read the licenense and make a decision based on that. Apparently, it's
free enough for RedHat to include it in their base. My feeling from
zreading their license is that it's about as borderline as it gets. 

Certainly not blatantly nonfree (unlike xv  for example ... )

ABout the only obstruction to it being a GPL license is that any thing
based on pine has to be called pine.

Anyway, on my editors page, I link to the pine license. 

-- Donovan