Re: Validity of DFSG #10
Le Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 01:32:20PM +0000, MJ Ray a écrit :
> Stefano Zacchiroli <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I didn't want to imply that we should change anything of that. We
> > should rather consolidate the work they do and index licenses,
> > decisions, and rationales for such decisions in a central place that
> > people can look at.
> I think there have been at least three attempts to index them in the
> past, but few seemed to care about them and so they gradually bitrot.
> Even the DFSGLicenses wiki page was last edited 2012-08-16 and now
> appears to be immutable.
> Who wants this index? Who's willing to put the time in? I'd be happy
> to help, although I won't lead another attempt.
I would be interested to contribute, but on the other hand, I do not thing that
it is possible to do serious work if the decision makers, the FTP team, do not
have enough time to explain precisely their decisions. For instance, I am not
able to understand by myself what in Creative Commons 2.5 changed to make it
acceptable for Debian, and I have not found this information in public
In the absence of (and even in parallel with) a curated list of Free and
non-Free licenses, I think that general statistics of what license are seen in
the main and non-free components of our archive would have value, without
requiring commitment from the FTP team.
There are now 1,387 Debian copyright files declaring a 1.0 machine-readable
format in the collab-qa/packages-metadata repository on svn.debian.org (see
http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata for details). This repository
is not perfect, but I think it can be a good start for people who do not have
access to lintian.debian.org.
Any volunteers ?
Have a nice day,
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan