[md: postfix license and opensource trade mark]

[Darren O. Benham]

On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 11:54:18AM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 1999 at 21:30:33 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > AFAIK IBM is marketing postfix (AKA "IBM Secure Mailer") as open source,
> > even if there is a conflicting clause in the license.
> 
> I haven't followed the discussion of the PostFix license in detail, but I
> think we should have clear answers to the following questions should be
> answered before we contact IBM officially:
[snip]
> - Does the clause actually violate the OSD, or is it an oversight in the
>   OSD/DFSG? If it is the latter, is it fixed in the current DFSG revision
>   proposal drafts?
I do not believe it's forbidden in the current DFSG.  It has been addressed
in the draft to make clauses like this non-DFSG-free.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 289 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-general/attachments/19990314/0b18bf5e/attachment.pgp