Re: [PROPOSAL] Full text of GPL must be included
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> writes:
> When the FSF starts playing by these rulkes, perhaps we shall
> have the basis of a discussion.
You seem to be regarding the FSF as the enemy here, and I think that's
unlikely to help.
The issue is about the downloading of advertised things, not things
like ftp:.../bin/ls or the like. The question of intent to distribute
The intent of Debian is to distribute not just a complete system, but
also individual packages. (Consider security alerts, which suggest
that people download specific package files.) The distribution of
those packages requires the GPL to be given along with the binaries,
and in fact it isn't. It isn't like we offer it and the user says
"no, I've alread got it", it just isn't there.
The FSF almost plays by that rule too: but you are quite right that
for patch files, and test binaries, and things like that, bits of
GPL'd binary or source are frequently advertised in a way that's very
parallel to the Debian situation. I asked RMS about that, and he
decided that he would need to ask the attorneys about it, because it
is indeed curious. So we may not know more until they get back to