On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 11:01:19PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 07:32:25PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > This has never been Debian's attitude, and it shouldn't be so now. > > If it has a license appropriate for inclusion in Debian, or the > > non-Debian nonfree archive, and there is a developer interested in > > maintaining Debian packages in accord with the usual rules, we should > > do so. > > If Transgaming wants to have a license that prohibits distribution, > > they can create one. > If they do so I believe we need to petition SourceForge to drop WineX as > clearly not even kinda free. I for one don't think they should be getting > a free ride when it comes to stuff that can't even be packaged by the > various distributions. > I would call for such a petition now, except that Transgaming is still > effectively pretending their license allows redistribution. Are you certain that WineX is hosted at SourceForge under the guise of being a free software project? Are you certain that SourceForge's standards for free software are in fact compatible with your, or Debian's, idea of free software? A quick glance at <http://sourceforge.net/projects/winex> shows that Transgaming hasn't been shy about their licensing terms; the page lists 'License: Other/Proprietary License' as plain as day. It sounds to me like petitioning SourceForge would be just another way to breed ill-will. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgp66Quk1a1V6.pgp
Description: PGP signature