Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> debian-devel re-added.
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 21:50:15 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 10:54:36AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > > and to the best of my knowledge, works licensed solely under the
> > > > CDDL have never been accepted in main.
> > > star | 1.5a57-1 | oldstable | source, alpha, arm, [...]
> > > star | 1.5a67-1 | stable | source, alpha, amd64, [...]
> > > http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/s/star/star_1.5a57-1/star.copyright
> > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=350624
> > Quoting from the bug log, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > | The CDDL mightn't be the best license in the world, and isn't GPL
> > | compatible, but it's still DFSG-free. Closing this bug with this
> > | message.
> > I do *not* agree that the CDDL meets the DFSG, especially when a choice
> > of venue is in place.
> That a poster to debian-legal doesn't think a license meets the DFSG
> isn't particularly useful information, and is even less so when that
> poster isn't a DD, a maintainer or someone in the n-m queue.
It's not like there aren't DDs who feel that it isn't DFSG free; Steve
Langasek and myself have consistently argued against it, and I doubt
we're the only two.
That said, can the ftpmaster who approved the inclusion of star in
main speak up and give their rationale?
Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you really want to test his
character, give him power.
-- Abraham Lincoln