Re: dh_python and python policy analysis
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: dh_python and python policy analysis
- From: Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 09:36:09 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 86ejw0c3h2.fsf@alhambra.kuesterei.ch>
- In-reply-to: <44CEBBC2.9080000@familiasanchez.net> (Roberto C. Sanchez's message of "Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:26:10 -0400")
- References: <874px1at6j.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <87vepe7q0f.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060731091720.GG2355@bee.dooz.org> <87mzap6w9x.fsf_-_@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <44CEBBC2.9080000@familiasanchez.net>
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net> wrote:
> Not sure if I missed it, but you seem to claim a copyright but not give
> an explicit license. I imagine you meant to put it under GPL or a free
> version of the GFDL. Could you please clarify and also add it to the
> document?
I couldn't care less whether this thing has a license or not, but if it
gets one, I'm sure Manoj will *not* choose any variant of the GNU "Free"
Documentation License. And nobody should do that, or encourage people
to use this flawed license. Note that we have voted by a GR that the
GFDL is acceptable under certain conditions - but not that it is a good
license. It isn't.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to: