[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)



Hi,

On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 04:18:20AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 18:00, Osamu Aoki wrote:
...
> > But US is not the only country in the world.
> 
> No, it's not. Thankfully. Otherwise, I'd never be able to play DVDs
> under Linux :-)
> 
> It does however happen to be the one SPI, Inc. and the master FTP server
> is located in.

Do not forget they are mirrored.  The initial request came from Debian
JP which mirror Debian with some additional localized packages.

> Personally, I'd like to know which countries copyright rules Debian is
> going to follow. I sincerely hope we do not have to only distribute that
> which is legal in all countries; I fear such content is quite rare.
> 
> > 
> > Anyway, the updated request for removal/update for these packages, I
> > hope, shall not contain reference to the "copyright" issues.  Then the
> > result of these legal assessments will be irrelevant for the request.
> 
> No, certainly the removal of packages from unstable is mostly at the
> maintainer's discretion. And if they happen to be ugly, hard to read, or
> otherwise unsuitable fonts, ftp-master should remove them from unstable.

Usually, removal request for unstable should come from maintainer. And
it should not be problem to remove them.  (I agree)

To explain background:

Muto-san is quite respected as the top dude of Debian JP project and he
sent the request after internal Debian JP agreement.  So you can assume
this was also maintainers the wish of all the maintainer.  

This situation may not have been clear to ftp-master.  (Or some
procedure may have been lacking)

Also, I think issue we discuss here is the removal of packages from
stable-point release.

That has not been concluded.

In short, if appropriate backported packages are installed for kochi-*,
we will not miss anything (or it will look nicer).  So we should remove
old affected packages and avoid any worry.

> PS: How good did my Mac's rendering of that glyph look?

Yes.  From mutt/X, it was seen.



Reply to: