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

Re: ITP: moria and questions about third party documentation

On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 07:56:43PM -0400, Rene Weber wrote:
> is "actually" Umoria 5.5.2.  Does anyone have a better suggestion?

Perhaps you could call it umoria (is it possible that someone would want
to package the original moria? Does it exist?) and have it Provides: moria,
setting up a whole alternatives thing. OR - if it is not conceivable that 
moria is ever packaged, forget it all and just package it as 'moria.'

> spoiler file.  In this case, is it preferable at the moment to package the
> spoiler file (a mere 45k gzipped) separately, or to package it together and
> remove it if umoria can be made DFSG-free, or should I just leave it out and
> avoid the trouble since it really isn't critical anyways?

Even if there were no license issues, I would say package it separately.
It's small but some people (ie me) would prefer not to cheat - not even have
the opportunity to cheat (well, I have no willpower) - unless we specifically
ask for it. (cf. Riven)

> 4)  The spoilers may not be distributed free in conjunction with any other 
>     product without the written consent of the author.  The only exception
>     is that this file may be included in the distribution for any version of 
>     Moria for which this document would apply.

Are we even legally allowed to distribute the spoilers file?

Reply to: