Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again

To: Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>
Cc: Scott Hanson <shanson@shcon.com>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 23:57:52 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] 19980703235752.E786@test.legislate.com>
Mail-followup-to: Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>, Scott Hanson <shanson@shcon.com>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 5696.899515224@hands.com>; from Philip Hands on Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 02:20:24AM +0100
References: <[🔎] 19980703194016.B786@test.legislate.com> <[🔎] 5696.899515224@hands.com>

Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> wrote:
> Those ``distribution restrictions'' boil down to us having no legal right to 
> distribute them at all AFAICS.

Yep.

I brought up the issue to underline the.. er.. simplicity of marking
packages such as qt "freely distributable, though not DFSG".

-- 
Raul


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

References:
- Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
  - From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
- Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
  - From: Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>

Prev by Date: Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
Next by Date: Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
Previous by thread: Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
Next by thread: Intent to Package mgdiff
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread