Re: DSFG Explanation for non-free packages?
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> wrote:
> 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.
Maybe not even a difference of opinion.
I think that the "document the reasoning" thing is a good idea, I'm just
concerned that the reasoning likely to be incomplete. [After all, you
only need one significant conflict with the DFSG to put something in
non-free, but a license may have a number of conflicts, some more subtle
than others.]
I just think it should be ok to document some of the points where a
license conflicts with the DFSG, and I really don't care what file
it goes into. I was thinking that merging it with other documentation
would emphasize this aspect, but maybe that's just a lame idea.
[I'm actually pretty good at coming up with lame ideas.]
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: