On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 03:26:38PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote: > On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 01:00:43PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Jesus Climent wrote: > > > What about "the list is not free"? > > > Do we want to have a list transfered to Debian which we cannot transfer to > > > anyone? > > The DSBL is not software, it's more like a free service, since it's > > part of the DNS. We can use this free service by doing DNS queries, or > > by downloading the zone files ourselves, but the end result is the same. > > Are you proposing that we reject free services? > Aren't we rejecting free documentation because is "Not Totally Free" (tm) > (that is, does not completelly follow DFSG) ?? Documentation becomes part of our distribution. Our server infrastructure does not. Should we also insist that all of our debian.org machines be hosted at providers that use Open Source routers, because the licensing terms of Cisco OSes are non-free? There are many things on the servers that don't come with an unequivocally free license. I haven't given you permission to modify and redistribute my .ssh/authorized_keys file. But like the DSBL, this is data, not software; I don't think we have to worry about criticism for the presence of non-free data, the way we would worry about, say, a non-free MTA. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpwAmKaLIoy3.pgp
Description: PGP signature