[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DEP-5: binary package affected by license $foo

On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 13:59 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > The rational is that sooner or later, we will want to use the
> > machine-interpretable copyright file to validate packages freeness,
> > license compatibilities and so on.
> Interesting. So you think a single source package could produce binary
> packages that are each judged differently for their DFSG status? I
> wonder what the FTP masters would say to that.
> (That could read sarcastically; it's not. I'm interested to know.) 

I don't know what the FTP masters will say, but it is, sadly, how
licences interact; given a single upstream that builds two binaries, one
which links to a GPL library, and one that doesn't (and which are
packaged into separate debs), then we've clearly got different
constraints placed on the two debs.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: