Re: Sun Java available from non-free
On Monday, 22 May 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 06:14:51PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 04:18:44PM -0500, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Right, but again, why bringing the package with a bad license into the
> > archive first?
> Because non-free is for "bad" licenses in the sense that they don't meet
> the DFSG, and because the Sun license is not "bad" in the sense that it
> causes any problems that we cannot deal with.
"Bad" as in "undistributable"?