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

Re: Are DFSG free package in non-us part of Debian?

Davide G. M. Salvetti wrote:
> ***** MS => Martin Schulze
> >>  Your admission is a key point.
> MS> No, it's not.
> Explain to me why, please, possibly by answering this simple question:
> is `The GNU Privacy Guard' DFSG free?

The DFSG doesn't cover law of certain countries, thus I have to admit
that the DFSG doesn't play the central role here.  Since the DFSG
only covers redistribution through license it seems to be DFSG free.
However due to lame crypto law it still cannot go into main and thus
no package in main may depend/recommend on/ it.

> MS> Since it cannot redistributed by a US citizen to a non-us citizen
> MS> it is not *perfectly* free.  I grant that it uses a free license
> MS> but still isn't freely redistributable.  No, I don't like that.
> I disagree most strongly with this interpretation, in fact I think
> it's perfectly free.

Then why is it in non-US instead of main?

> Don't skip my question, please, what will you do if some exotic
> country introduced export restrictions on C compilers, will you kick
> gcc out of main?  I can't believe you will.  Please don't tell me that

The compiler is a bad example, since a distribution without a C compiler
can't exist.

If you're referring to some sort of vi or other program, yes, we would
have to, otherwise we won't be able to provide free software for
these countries.  I assume that you won't want to keep this countries
from using Debian / free software.

> MS> Believe me that I don't like it either but I cannot fix broken US
> MS> crypto law by programming.  Please talk to the american senat or
> MS> something, try to get involved with EFF and similar campaigns.
> I'm not a US citizen, I just worked there for some time.  It's not a
> major problem of my life what the US government will decide on this
> issue: I support such efforts as I can, but I think this completely
> misses my point.  The States are not the world, neither are the world
> center.  You are aware that some packages in main may be illegal in
> some country because of their contents? (Think of the Bible, I'm not
> sure, but I won't be surprised to discover that there exist counties
> were people aren't permitted to read it.)

I remember that we already had such a discussion some time ago.  In that
case we have to remove these packages from main or we won't support those
countries.  This is a question if we want to spread free software and
provide users with a free distribution of Linux or let them stick with
Slackware etc.

> MS> We also cannot include it into main since it is not freely
> MS> redistributable.
> In the U.S., which, I'll repeat myself, are not the center of the
> world.

In non-US you can link contrib and non-US together with main and you're
done.  What's the problem?

> In Germany you could have it included in main.  What if main contained
> some package illegal in Germany (a very extreme example would be a
> nazi text, not that I think we will ever let such a text in main, I'm
> just arguing).

create non-DE.



Unix is user friendly ...  It's just picky about its friends.

Reply to: