Re: Ranting...
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Ranting...
- From: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 20:48:43 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050308194843.GA13107@pegasos>
- In-reply-to: <20050308174204.GA20751@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de>
- References: <20050304095755.GG4936@mauritius.dodds.net> <20050307184657.GI2193@redwald.deadbeast.net> <d0jtf9$8rl$1@wonderland.linux.it> <20050308105657.GB16263@suffields.me.uk> <20050308143225.GA5634@pegasos> <422dca6d$0$2764$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com> <20050308160530.GF5634@pegasos> <20050308163108.GA20541@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de> <20050308165424.GA10167@pegasos> <20050308174204.GA20751@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:42:04PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> [050308 18:12]:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 05:31:08PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> [050308 17:18]:
> > > > Many DDs only want to package their package in peace, and not get dragged info
> > > > a many-thousand -legal flamewar over imagined DFSG non-compliance and bogus
> > > > tests.
> > >
> > > That also works the other way around: I tend more to believe that most
> > > DDs want to only package their things in peace, and not interfer with
> > > old discussions about long ago tested and found to be good tests.
> >
> > unless those tests are used to randomly jank their packages from the archive,
> > then they will react, i believe, as i was forced to do.
>
> I spoke about most DDs. That people not caring about freedom find the
> idea of freedom ridiculous is nothing new.
What has that to do with it ? The fact that dubious tests are used, and that
they can be used to reach wrong or not based-ont-the-DFSG decisions has
nothing to do with freedom or not freedom. And claiming that a consensus has
been reached without even giving the maintainer a chance to get in the
discussion don't help.
And i recuse your accusation that i don't care about freedom, and ask you to
either take it back, or to give real facts proving how you came to this
situation.
> And, for the record, there are already references to the desert island
> test in 2002 (see http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/01/msg00010.html
> for example). And I doubt that will be the youngest version of that...
> (Though I think before that it was not always the island, but the
> scientists in the jungle, or things like that...)
Yep, and i reject that analysis in the light of the problematic QPL clause
that got me muddled hip-deep into debian-legal 6 month ago.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: