RE: GPL violation? (Was: v1.6 Enhanced SNACC Freeware)

["Pawling, John" <John.Pawling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

W. Bogert,

I agree that the eSNACC public license should be included with the
esnacc software.  We will ensure that that it is included in future
releases.

-John Pawling

-----Original Message-----
From: W. Borgert [mailto:debacle@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 6:17 PM
To: Pawling, John
Cc: Bertapelle, Matt; imc-snacc; imc-cml; imc-sfl; rms@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: GPL violation? (Was: v1.6 Enhanced SNACC Freeware)

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 07:57:42AM -0500, Pawling, John wrote:
> In summary, the Enhanced SNACC compiler and library are being
> distributed properly as per Michael Sample and the University of
British
> Columbia.
> 
> Please see the attached Enhanced SNACC public license for futher
> information.

Thanks very much for the clarification.  While I'm nor a
lawyer nor any kind of expert on the matter, I think this is
absolutely OK.  Maybe I'm blind, but I did not find this
license in the esnacc-1.6.tar.gz archive.  It would prevent
further confusion, if you just put the complete license into
the next release of eSNACC.  The GPL is already included,
which makes people believe that the complete package might
be GPLed.

Cheers, WB

(Minor point: You changed the name of the GPL file from
COPYING into copying.  This is a little bit unusual.  You
changed also ChangeLog into changelog, Makefile into
makefile, NEWS into news, which is also not consistent with
most other software I know.  Would you mind to change this
back?  Also, the ChangeLog has not changed since 1997...)