[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is NPL DFSG complient or not?

>>"Adam" == Adam P Harris <apharris@burrito.onshore.com> writes:

 Adam> Personally, I consider it the package maintainer's duty to
 Adam> comply with license minutae, not Debian's.  I'm positioned to
 Adam> offer every version of some MPL'd s/w by virtue of CVS.

	You shall find that not all developers are in that happy
 position. And you shall also find, I think, that most developers were
 also not aware of this requirement when they sign up -- and I think
 this is a requirement that is too harsh on developers in general.

	Why can't Debian keep older versions? 

 Adam> Since
 Adam> I can do that, I can comply with the license.  Therefore Debian
 Adam> is in compliance with the license.  Therefore, the package can
 Adam> go in "main".

	Umm, nope. If debian is ditributing it, Debian is
 responsible as well (when are things that easy?). I do not think
 passing the buck to individual developers is the way to go.

 I lost my drive late last year, and my backup for /home was corrupt,
 so it is merely luck that I have my old CVS repository
 After the game the king and the pawn go in the same box. Italian
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

Reply to: