Re: is the license of gsview okay?
From: David Starner <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: is the license of gsview okay?
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:48:28 -0600
> > Then, at installation with preinst, one can ask a user
> > if you agree all terms and conditions of pstotext's license?
> > and if a user selects 'Yes' then install gsview otherwise
> > aborts to install. But this seems to be insufficient...
> Please don't - whether or not it's sufficient (which is true - we
> already distributed it by the time they see that message), it's
> obnoxious and something that should be avoided if possible.
Yes, I understood your point so I said it was insufficient
(but I am not sure this meant what I wanted to say).
> Please don't package this if you don't use it. I doubt there is many
> (any, hopefully) Debian developers who want to see non-free grow, and
> especially not for a redundant Postscript view. We have gv, ghostview,
> gnome-gv and the KDE one in Debian. We don't need a non-free Postscript
Oh, please don't worry so much. Please note I said I was
interested in gsview but not I was going to package gsview.
I want to clarify the license issue of gsview and it is
quite another issue if it is preferable or not to package
gsview. Please concentrate on the license issue in this
lists. If I want to argue about non-free packages then I would
ask in debian-devel lists.
Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.