Re: Bug#251983: libcwd: QPL license is non-free; package should not be in main
On Sat, Jun 05, 2004 at 01:38:26AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > If this is agreed upon by everyone - then it makes sense to talk
> > about the choice of venue versus choise of law thing.
> > Provided that libcwd WILL be included in Debian, I am willing to
> > change the wording of the last sentence into one that only states
> > a choice of law, not venue. But then it must be very clear that
> > that is enough for making the license pass DFSG as such a change
> > would be irrevocable.
>
> Well, we went over it very carefully, and those two were the only problem
> issues we saw. I would be willing to say that that was enough, though I
> obviously can't speak for everyone, let alone future generations of
> debian-legal.
Particularly considering that many of us would like to see the patch exception
removed from the DFSG. That may never happen; but it may.
(Seriously. Patch clauses are a deliberate and onerous impediment to code
reuse. They belong in Debian almost as little as invariant sections. I
personally consider this by far the most serious problem in the DFSG.)
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: