Re: non-free and "cd-ok", again
Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com> writes:
> LeRoy D. Cressy <ldc@netaxs.com> wrote:
> > I think that it is ashame that we have to expend all of this
> > energy on protecting ourselves from the wolves.
>
> That's hardly the only reason we leave packages out of "main".
>
> Historically, we've also respected the wishes of the author, if the
> author askes us not to distribute, even when the license would have
> allowed us to distribute.
Additional: It is the copyright-holders job to express his conditions
in the license. He is free to choose about any stupid condition:
Either we obey them or we can't use, distribute etc. his work. It is
the copyright holder who makes distribution difficult, not Debian. If
he wanted to see his software distributed he should have chosen a
license that matches this wish: There are several free licenses
already available (BSD, MIT, GPL), so there is no need to invent one.
BTW: Which mailing list is intended to discuss issues regarding
the licenses of the non-free software? IMHO this shouldn't go into
-devel ...
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph <sr1@inf.tu-dresden.de>
http://www.sax.de/~sr1/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: