Re: "Waqf" General Public License in Debian?
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Matthias Klumpp <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 16:12:55 +0430, Mohammad Ebrahim Mohammadi Panah
> <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>>> Oh suuuuuure. "We are all about freedom, but please no religional
>>>> stuff. Oh, and while we are at, get away with porn. And alcohol is bad
>>>> too, anything that can help people there, get away....."
>>>> Thats not how it works, we cant ask anyone putting things in main to
>>>> discriminate against persons/groups/fields and then discriminate on our
>>> I guess it's quite easy for to judge things like this using common
>> I don't think my common sense is anything near yours. Isn't Debian
>> supposed to be for all of us?
> I think this is not the question at all. I clearly agree with adding
> packages related to religious stuff, and this application has a right to be
> in Debian too. But there is this serious problem with the license: Relying
> on "Islamic laws" is not acceptable. The license text is full of references
> to prophets sayings and "permissive principles of Islam". I don't thing
> this is compliant with the DFSG, cause it does not explain clear enough
> what you can do with the software and even Muslims have do argue about it.
> In my opinion relying on religious stuff in licenses should not be
> permitted. If upstream chooses a BSD-style license etc. there should be no
> problem to accept this upload.
> I think the ftp-masters will do the right thing too, but I'm sure they need
> to think a lot about it before they make a decision.
I said that saying assuming we're talking about including it in
non-free. I completely agree it cannot be in main.