Re: Non-free, Contrib and CDs
Alex Yukhimets wrote:
>
> > Even when we could simply move QT to contrib at no cost to ourselves? I don't
> > think that it would be proper if a package that can be distributed on CDs
> > (and which our maintainer has actually asked the authors about) isn't
> > distributed simply because we've placed it in non-free together with others
> > that can't and provide the advice that CDROM producers skip the section if they
> > don't ask the authors.
>
> Wait a second. From your previous posting I thought you are just
> against distributing anything on CD which depends on something
> outside. Now I understand that you are only arguing that QT must go
> to contrib instead of non-free. Do you yhink it was mistakenly placed
> there or you want to change policy regarding non-free/contrib
> division?
I'm not entirely sure of what the policy says what should go into non-free or
contrib. That is why I asked this question a few messages earlier which nobody
responded too. (All the responses were to the latter paragraph which was
merely an instantiation of the hypothetical question).
The qt1 package contains information that indicates clearly that qt can be
distributed on CDs at least for the Debian distribution. If you don't believe
me, go install the qt1 package and read what's in /usr/doc/qt1.
> If later, I guess that if so many people rise this question, it is
> worth to be discussed at large. Starting from the reasons of having
> this two directories outside of main distribution and finishing by
> assigning may be more appropriate names for them.
>
> I agree that we should not touch "free software guidelines" at the
> moment, let's discuss the structure of debian outside of main
> distribution.
I have no problem with applying our Social Contract and conclude that QT is
not free software (In fact, I think that the KDE developpers got it wrong when
they choosed QT in the first place). What I am against is putting QT in a
section that is labeled "Do not distribute unless you're damn sure" when the
author has clearly said that it can be distributed on CDs.
There is another alternative to moving QT from non-free to contrib, and that is
we should start a list of packages in non-free that are clearly redistributable
and refer to that list when we advise the CDROM distributors to check for
copyrights of packages in non-free. The problem with is that we'll have to
advertise this list pretty hard since the CDROM distributors have already
gotten into a habit of excluding non-free.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 1.3 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://greathan.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://greathan.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: