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

Re: Documentation and Sarge's Release Critical Policy

Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> a tapoté :

> On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 03:29:00AM +0200, Claus Färber wrote:
> > Brian T. Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu> schrieb/wrote:
> > > But since Debian distributes only software, and Invariants must be
> > > Secondary... actually, isn't the GNU Manifesto non-secondary when
> > > distributed as part of Debian GNU/Whatever?
> > 
> > There are even some immutable files in base-files that are obviously
> > _not_ secondary but payload:
> > 
> > /usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic
> > /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD
> > /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2
> > /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2
> > /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2.1
> > 
> > If you move licence texts to an own package (or a package that includes
> > them so that other packages can point to that copy) to save disk space,
> > they become non-secondary.
> Actually, that's not true.  They're only "payload" to relieve our
> packages, our repositories, and our users from the disk consumption that
> would result from shipping the applicable license(s) along with each
> package.  Please review Debian Policy on this subject.

It's true that these files _must_ be included in Debian since Debian
ships software under these licenses, and it's true that, whatever the
number of package that carries these files, these files are immutable.

Without these files, Debian cannot legally distribute free software
under GPL, BSD, LGPL... so these files are obviously _not_ secondary,
as said Claus.

> If it weren't for the restrictions that copyright laws place upon us, we
> wouldn't ship these files at all.

If no licenses were needed, nobody would be writing and shipping

Mathieu Roy
  Not a native english speaker: 

Reply to: