Re: FilterProxy and DFSG-compliancy?
On Friday 09 March 2001 17:08, Bob McElrath wrote:
> Yep, that would be a pain. Which is why Debian requires things in main
> to be uniformly licensed, and why FilterProxy belongs in non-free.
So with those words, I'm just going to fulfill my ITP, and put it in
non-free. Thanks everybody for helping out on the discussion, and please go
see Bob McElrath's homepage on FilterProxy
<http://draal.physics.wisc.edu/FilterProxy/> for more information on
FilterProxy - contrary to many peoples belief, it is not only about filtering
ads, it's also about possibly repairing broken sites, minimizing
bandwidth-usage (both by rewriting the html, but also with
transfer/content-encoding), and anonymization by excluding http-headers.
> I don't disagree with the DFSG, nor the reasons behind it.
I just thought I'd leave that comment from the author of FilterProxy. It's
going in non-free, we've gotten that straight. The license isn't going to
change, and I feel it would be a shame if it was changed. But make up your