I've just had a glance at the releas candidate 1. The file LICENSE has grown somewhat, but not as much as I feared... looking at the contents I find the following as only reference to the CNRI license (which holds all the surprises we talked about in the early beta stages): """ CNRI OPEN SOURCE LICENSE AGREEMENT ---------------------------------- Python 1.6 is made available subject to the terms and conditions in CNRI's License Agreement. This Agreement together with Python 1.6 may be located on the Internet using the following unique, persistent identifier (known as a handle): 1895.22/1012. This Agreement may also be obtained from a proxy server on the Internet using the following URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1012. """ Such a note is nice and short, but not legally binding and confusing since it is not clear whether the "handle" for the document will always return the same license text or if it will return a license text at all. It would be more appropriate to include the original CNRI license text, IMHO. Or is there some hidden motivation behind using the handle ? -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4