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