On Tuesday 14 June 2005 18.21, Eric Dorland wrote: > * Matthew Garrett (mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk) wrote: > > Julien BLACHE <jblache@debian.org> wrote: > > > Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > > >> What is DFSG 4 if not a grudging acceptance of this sort of > > >> behaviour as free? > > > > > > (This is a compromise. The Debian Project encourages all authors to > > > not restrict any files, source or binary, from being modified.) > > > > > > Says it all. > > > > Right. We don't like it, but we think it's free. > > > > > Requiring a name change because we apply a security patch or fix a > > > bug crosses the border. It's not like if we were forking their > > > codebase. > > > > We have permission to apply security patches and fix bugs without > > changing the name. > > We (as in Debian) may have the permission, but that permission does > not flow downstream. So? As I understand DSFG 8, this covers only the case that the firefox package distributed by Debian *as is* must still be usable legally when used outside Debian. Yes, it's not nice, it's crap, but it's still entirely possible within the (pseudo-)legal framewark Debian gives itself. cheers -- vbi -- featured product: the KDE desktop - http://kde.org
Attachment:
pgpA3FLVDBy_a.pgp
Description: PGP signature