Re: Debian's Linux kernel continues to regress on freedom
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:07:43 +0300, Faidon Liambotis <paravoid@debian.org> said:
> Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> On 2007-09-12, Faidon Liambotis <paravoid@debian.org> wrote:
>>> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>>>
>>> You're not checking for copyright violations or for non-free stuff
>>> in all other packages.
> I obviously meant all other *existing* source packages, i.e. all the
> uploads that don't pass through NEW.
Can you point me to violations of the DFSG, please? I would like
to get these other packages fixed as well. Do you klnow about opther
packages where, after knowing about DFSG violations for three years, no
action is being taken?
>>> The only reason that things like linux-2.6.XX pass through NEW is,
>>> from my POV, because noone stepped up to fix it so that old source
>>> packages don't have to pass through.
>>
>> I don't consider it something needing fixing. It is a good way to
>> have the copyright files occasionally reviewed.
> I don't think that old source packages are re-reviewed for copyright
> violations/non-freeness. But I could easily be wrong.
I think every maintainer is supposed to be doing this for their
own packages. Only when we have evidence that the maintainers are not
doing their job does Joerg have to spend his time doing their job for
them.
> Even if that is not the case, I don't think that Joerg's time should
> be spent that way, TBH -- but that not up to me :)
Indeed. Maintainers should be doing this on their own. And, if
there is a mistake, they should be willing to correct it when it is
pointed out to them.
manoj
--
"Unix: a moment of convenience, a lifetime of regret." old ITS hacker
saying
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: