Re: Packages to be removed from hamm
On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 09:59:24PM +0000, Rev. Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 10:22:30AM -0700, David Welton wrote:
> > ircii 21683 ircii: ircii is non-free! [26] (Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@debian.org>)
> > tkirc depends on ircii
> >
> > In addition to these two packages, bitchx and epic should also be
> > removed.
>
> Afaik, the ircII issue has not been resolved yet. Removing all of the major
> ircII-based clients is crippling hamm. Wait for resolution of the problem
> before you go out of your way to hurt the entire dist.
I would tend to agree - infact, I maintain epic, and it irks me to see
it go into non-free.
> > Debian-policy also is not free, as it contains the fsstnd. As has
> > been noted elsewhere, parts of perl-doc are not free.
> >
> > Given the ongoing status of all of these (I am going to attempt to
> > contact Mr Sandrof later today.. People still haven't really decided
> > what we should do as far as licensing of standards and documentation),
> > I think we ought to leave them alone for now.
>
> I think this whole mess is being blown WAY OUT OF PROPORTION here.
Well.. WRT the irc packages, I think so.. their non-freeness is pretty
dubious (more than anything, they just have an unclear license, but
the authors seem to think it is free).
The other stuff is sort of a quandary.. I mean.. standards are
standards, and aren't worth much if anyone can edit and redistribute
them;-)
On the other hand, translating, reformatting, borrowing pieces,
improving in the future.. or forking documentation for other projects
are all quite valid. We have yet to really define a good line as far
as free documentation is concerned.
Ciao,
--
David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw
Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: