Re: [leganii@surfree.com: Re: FWD: C-Kermit & potato]
I don't see why people are arguing about anything. C-Kermit was
not meant to be `free' AFAICT. The intent was to make it
included in distributions. Putting it in non-free accomplishes
their main goal even if it won't be on official Debian CDs (it
will at least be packaged). The stripped-down G-Kermit will go
on Debian CDs (in main) and everyone will be happy.
Right?
Frank da Cruz wrote:
> Peter Makholm <peter@makholm.net> wrote:
> >
> > Problem1: I can't see any rights to modify the code, just redistribute it.
> >
> That's a fine point. You can modify the code all you want but since I
> have to support it now and forever, I need to get the changes. Debian isn't
> the only place where C-Kermit is built -- there are about 800 others. I
> can't support 800 different forked code bases. The reason C-Kermit works
> in the broad sense of "works" is that the development is centrally coordinate
> d
> and there is only one code base.
>
> > Problem2: If I can't distribute a program with solaris i anin't free in
> > Debians sense of freeness.
> >
> You're free to define free however you want. So am I :-) It's a big,
> complicated world.
>
> C-Kermit 7.0 is free to you and all your users.
Free as in free beer, yes.
> What happens after that
> is a philosophical question. Do you care more about license purity than you
> do about providing a useful tool to your users? Of course it's your choice.
Debian cares more about license purity for what goes in main, of
course. The otherwise useful tool to our users goes in contrib
or non-free archives.
> - Frank
--
Peter Galbraith, research scientist <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Maurice Lamontagne Institute, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
P.O. Box 1000, Mont-Joli Qc, G5H 3Z4 Canada. 418-775-0852 FAX: 775-0546
6623'rd GNU/Linux user at the Counter - http://counter.li.org/
Reply to: