Re: Mass bug filing: Cryptographic protection against modification
Matthew Garrett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>Thats clearly not DFSG free.
>>And no, those files are not the license of the source they acomplish
>>but stand on their own.
> The alternative to distributing a copy of the GPL in base-files would be
> to distribute a copy of it in every package that contains code under the
> GPL. Since we could trivially satisfy your complaint by including a tiny
> quantity of GPLed code in base-files, pragmatism suggests that it's a
> stupid suggestion.
> Matthew Garrett | email@example.com
Dual licensed under the other licenses too please.
Some of the data files in base-files are already under GPL (see
/usr/share/doc/base-files/copyright) so it would be just the Artistic,
BSD and LGPL licenses.
But thats rather beside the point. The point is that not 100% of
Debian is free and never will be. Some things have to be
excluded. Till the SC change non programms were excluded. Now nothing
seems to be.