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

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 01:12:27AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I think before Debian puts anything in main it should remove any
> invariant sections from the work, just as we do with non-free source
> code.  I once had a big old nasty flamewar with the FTP admins that
> was tangentially related to this point, but the FTP admins and I agreed
> that having non-free source code in a package's .orig.tar.gz was
> unacceptable even if it wasn't "used for anything" and did not appear in
> any binary packages.

As far as I know, we're happy to accept non-free stuff in pristine
.orig.tar.gz's as long as it's not used. If you don't have a pristine
.orig.tar.gz anyway, then it's silly to include unused non-free stuff,
but it's not cause for a REJECT.

> In other words, invariant sections (small I, small S) are not DFSG-free,
> but the removal of invariant sections from a work may be sufficient to
> render it DSFG-free.

Assuming that's allowed by the license of course. As far as I'm aware, it's
quite okay to do this in either the .diff.gz or debian/rules, though.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- 
        you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''

Attachment: pgpO_RA859gz4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: