Re: Documentation and Sarge's Release Critical Policy
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 08:14:45 -0400 (EDT), Walter Landry <email@example.com> said:
> Adam Warner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 15:00, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>> > I'd rather we stick to our principles, but clearly there isn't a
>> > consensus on that.
>> That's a low blow.
>> So what's your timeline for migration? Move Emacs into non-free
>> today? The .orig.tar.gz files contain what we consider
>> non-DFSG-free files, and .orig.tar.gz files in main and contrib are
>> supposed to meet the DFSG.
> I don't think is the case. The .orig.tar.gz files only have to be
> purged of non-free stuff if that stuff can't be distributed at all.
> AIUI, it is perfectly acceptable to have non-free stuff in the
> .orig.tar.gz file that is removed by the debian patch.
Not if the orig.tar.gz is to live in main. And if the
orig.tar.gz is not in main, none of the binaries derived from it can
be in main.
Arnold's Addendum: Anything not fitting into these categories causes
cancer in rats.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C