License discussions in Debian (was: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta)
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> See, given that as an ftpmaster I'm one of the folks who actually
> implements the policy on what's accepted into main or not, it's not my
> loss at all.
I think that Debian would very much benefit if there was a place (call
it debian-legal@l.d.o or whatever) where our policy with regard to
individual software's licenes could be discussed with the input of those
who actually set this policy: the ftpmasters.
If debian-legal isn't the place for you (and AFAIK none of the other
ftpmasters is a regular), maybe we need a new start and a different
format. But it's a pity that there's no way to get the ftpmasters'
opinion except by trying, and no regular way at all, it seems, to get
the reasons for their decisions.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
- Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>