Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> > Policy section 2.1.4 says:
> > `Non-free' contains packages which are not compliant with the DFSG or
> > which are encumbered by patents or other legal issues that make their
> > distribution problematic.
> > All packages in `non-free' must be electronically distributable
> > across international borders.
> Many patent encumbered programs do not satisfy this requirement.
If they don't satisfy this requirement they can neither be in Debian nor
> > Policy section 2.1.5 says:
> > Some programs with cryptographic program code must be stored on the
> > "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
> > This applies only to packages which contain cryptographic code. A
> > package containing a program with an interface to a cryptographic
> > program or a program that's dynamically linked against a
> > cryptographic
> > library can be distributed if it is capable of running without the
> > cryptography library or program.
> > Note: "This applies only to packages which contain cryptographic code."
> I can read too; as a mirror maintainer I'm telling you how things work
> in practice.
A program in non-US/main has to be DFSG free and you must be allowed to
use it everywhere - including the USA. "non-US" doesn't mean "you mustn't
use it in the USA" but "you are allowed to use it in the USA; you aren't
allowed to export it from the USA". What else are you doing "in practice"?
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
-- Mahatma Ghandi