On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 03:02:48PM -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. I'm know that. => Um, could you be persuaded to compile the ircII's with the xon/xoff option off? I kinda like to use ^s/^q in the client and ^s is bound to toggle_stop_screen by default anyway. I'm not sure there's a large need for xon/xoff anymore (I'm about to be corrected I'm sure) but it's just a suggestion. > > 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. The question I have regarding the FSSTND is this: Does it matter since we plan to move to FHS in slink anyway? <g>
Attachment:
pgpgY69LePIkT.pgp
Description: PGP signature