Re: deb for netbeans
On Fri, 03 May 2002 09:45:21 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> said:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 11:46:42PM -0700, Nicos Panayides wrote:
>
> > I was wondering now that you mensioned the java2 vm. I've seen on the
> > "packages being worked on" list that openoffice debs are being prepared.
> > I am not sure how accurate this list is but openoffice is on. As far as
> > i know both openoffice and sun's jdk have the same licenses. How come
> > sun's jdk (or derivatives like ibm and blackdown) are not considered for
> > non-free? It's not like there is no demand for 1.3+ compliant
> > vm/libraries.
>
> OpenOffice is available under the Sun Industry Source License or the LGPL
> (dual licensed)[0]. The LGPL is clearly a DFSG-compliant license. Sun's JDK
> is under the Sun Community Source License, which is not[1].
>
> [0] http://www.openoffice.org/license.html
>
> [1] http://Www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch2.html
I thought that the build process of OpenOffice depended on [I'm being
vague here :-(] "some bundle of Java2 stuff," which would have the
result that despite OpenOffice itself being "free software," since a
build requires distinctly nonfree stuff, it can't go in "free."
It's almost enough to make you want to throw up your hands and say, "why
bother trying?"
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.gultn@" "enworbbc"))
http://www.cbbrowne.com/info/wp.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #24. "I will maintain a realistic
assessment of my strengths and weaknesses. Even though this takes some
of the fun out of the job, at least I will never utter the line "No,
this cannot be! I AM INVINCIBLE!!!" (After that, death is usually
instantaneous.)" <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: