Re: DSFG Explanation for non-free packages?
Hi,
>>"Raul" == Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com> writes:
Raul> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> wrote:
>> I think there is. Raul has demonstrated people have a hard
>> time figuring out licences; a file is important to point out why the
>> package is not part of debian. These shall also help people make
>> decisions about other licences; and find out of they are indeed
>> non-DFSG.
Raul> I think there's some need for explanation, but I don't think this
Raul> warrants a separate file. If we had some legal expert go over the
Raul> thing and offer an opinion, that might be worth a separate file.
Well, now we are down to a matter of opinion. I would like to
know why a package is not in Debian, and having a list of such
reasons helps me evaluate any further licences I see. We can also
point people to the file to answer why the package is not part of
debian.
I think that the cost of a separate file is not too much to
pay for the benefits. YMMV.
manoj
--
The energy required to change either one of two states will always be
more than you wish to expend, but never so much as to make the task
impossible. David Gerrold
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: