Re: Is NPL DFSG complient or not?
>>"Adam" == Adam P Harris <email@example.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> 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 <firstname.lastname@example.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