On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:41:07AM +1100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: > * Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> [2003-10-25 18:37]: > > Can you explain what the policy is for which non-freeness issues > > *will* be regarded as "sarge-ignore"? > ... > > It is difficult, from these data, to discern what exactly the policy > > for "sarge-ignore" and licensing issues is. > I'm afraid I cannot give you an answer to this. As you should know from > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200308/msg00010.html > or #97671, "sarge-ignore" is used and defined by the Release Manager. Or, more canonically: ] Further to this, certain issues may be exempted from being considered ] release critical for sarge by the release manager. This is expressed ] by tagging the report "sarge-ignore"; this should not be done without ] explicit authorisation from the release manager. ] 1. DFSG-freeness ] ] Code in main and contrib must meet the DFSG, both in .debs and ] in the source (including the .orig.tar.gz) ] ] Documentation in main and contrib must be freely distributable, ] and wherever possible should be under a DFSG-free license. This ] will likely become a requirement post-sarge. -- http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgpLHH_iPm8iG.pgp
Description: PGP signature