Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 06:33:16PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 04:18:42AM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > I haven't used postfix, but I feel obligated to point out (yet again)
> > that the only reason qmail isn't in main is because the author does
>
> the only reason other programs are in non-free is because they also fail
> one or more of the criteria in the DFSG.
>
> > not allow modified binaries to be distributed, and insists on a
> > particular directory structure for binary distributions.
>
> yes, it is non-free. you can't distributed modified versions.
Ah, however you can distribute patches, and a specific exception is made in
the open source definition to allow software that allows distribution of
patches. The same exception is made in the DFSG. (See section 4 in both
documents.)
> it's also inferior to postfix, so it doesn't really matter.
That's your opinion. I'll at least agree that postfix is an acceptable
alternative.
--Adam
Reply to: