On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 11:32:06PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Any file which builds with texinfo.tex missing or empty is OK as far as
> this license conflict goes. (The GFDL is still a non-free license, of
> course, and I'm sad that sarge will deliberately contain lots of
> non-free stuff, but that's another matter.)
> Sadly any .dvi, .pdf, or other file generated using TeX is an illegal
> license combination and is undistributable.
Have you talked to upstream about this? If it is a problem, it's certainly
something that can be fixed, and is likely to be fixed quickly. If it's
not a problem, upstream has more experience with the legal issues that
matter, and will be able to explain it to us.
> Safer just to remove all that non-free GFDL stuff.
We're here to fix problems and provide a userful service to our users, not
to find excuses to remove stuff we've decided we dislike.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
pgpdBj54nToH6.pgp
Description: PGP signature