Dear malc,
On 3 January 2013 10:02, malc av1474@comtv.ru wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Heiki "Repentinus" Ojasild wrote:
PDFreaders.org team would be delighted to have another free reader listed; however, the licensing must be both clear and concise; furthermore, the licensing must be explained in a notice accompanying the software.
In addition, based on malc's response, the software, especially if distributed in binary form, should be licensed as a whole and under a Free Software licence. A list of such licences can be found at https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html, a website operated by the Free Software Foundation. The list of licences that can be found at http://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical should also do; however, please prefer 'Free Software' over 'Open Source' in your marketing. (RMS from our sister FSF explains the reasons at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html.)
I, personally, do not distribute binary copies, if i did it would have been GPL simply because MuPDF (the library used to turn various documents) into pixmaps is licensed under it, if just adding a text that the combined binary (which, again, i do not make) is bound by the GPL would be enough, that i can do.
While PDFreaders.org team would love to see another reader listed, I am afraid the proposed solution is not enough. We must place the user first and, although this places quite a burden on the developer, thus cannot endorse solutions that come only half way. If you ever do sort out the licensing in a manner that is clear, feel free to contact us again.
Sincerely,