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

Re: Bug#202723: perl-doc: Non-free manpage included



On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 01:25:52AM +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> This manpage (and a few others) are very important parts of the
> perl package documentation.  Separating it from perl is a
> non-option from the perspective of users.

Objection. The sole purpose of this manpage is to duplicate things
contained in other documentation. It is not an important part of the
perl documentation, which is complete in itself and generally much
better written.

> I believe that this file should be considered as acceptable
> under the following interpretation of the DFSG:
> 
> DFSG 1 says that the freedoms need only apply in the context of
> larger diverse distributions, and need not apply to individual
> files or even packages when those files or packages are taken
> out of context.  At least this appears to be the only meaningful
> reading of the phrase "...as a component of an aggregate
> software distribution containing programs from several different
> sources."
> 
> The license on perlreftut and several other key perl manpages
> says that when not taken out of context, the file may be used
> under the Artistic license.
> 
> DFSG 10 says that the Artistic license can be assumed to meet
> the DFSG.

I believe that this interpretation is insane.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: pgpz7aqV3lRnT.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: