Re: Bruce - fiat required to end discussion on lyx/copyright ?
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Dale Scheetz writes ("Re: Bruce - fiat required to end discussion on lyx/copy
right ?"):
> ...
> > Pine is in non-free because it's copyright places restrictions on the
> > distribution of source. Xforms has more severe restrictions on the
> > distribution of source than pine does. It is my understanding that this
> > source distribution restriction is what makes Xforms' proper location to
> > be non-free.
>
> Please read chapter 2 of the new policy manual.
>
This is my synopsis of the relevant parts of Chapter 2:
Packages go into contrib if their copyrights or patents require that they:
a. allow distribution of no source code
b. allow distribution of only some source code, but not all the source code
needed to compile the program (even given the existence of other sources
in the Debian distribution).
c. depend on a non-free or contrib package in order to be used
d. allow use only for a trial period
e. lack vital functionality
f. are installer packages
g. fail to meet some other policy requirement
Packages go into non-free if their copyrights or patents require that they:
h. disallow distribution for profit
i. disallow distribution on certain media
j. disallow distribution except if special permission is obtained
k. have "any other onerous conditions".
My reactions:
Condition (a) is redundant, given condition (b).
It is not clear either what is meant by condition (k), nor how condition
(k) differs from condition (g). Without such a distinction, non-free
and contrib overlap.
The word "onerous" in condition (k) would seem inconsistent with
the Debian objective to be "a base upon which value-added
GNU/Linux distributions can be built."
Susan Kleinmann
Reply to: