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

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 10:49:26PM +0200, Thomas Uwe Gruettmueller wrote:

> > There's lots of software in non-free that is freely
> > distributable, but non-free for other reasons, such as
> > limitations on commercial use.  Non- free things should go in
> > non-free, even if there's a lack of free equivalents.

> I agree that they should not stay in main, but I don't think 
> that freely distributable documents should be mixed with stuff 
> which is not allowed to be distributed commercially, or which 
> according to its license, cannot be exported to Iraq. 

Why should Debian distinguish between different shades of non-freeness?
Are you aware that there is much software already in non-free which is
freely redistributable but non-modifiable?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpPSci8rkzHJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: