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

Re: DFSG#10 [was: Re: Draft Debian-legal summary of the LGPL]

On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 05:50:31PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 05:36:42PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> > On May 25, 2004, at 01:03, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > >I don't think requiring a verbatim statement is "supporting
> > >documentation" is any less obnoxious than requiring a verbatim 
> > >statement
> > >in "advertising materials".
> > 
> > I disagree. It's usually in any of the "supporting documentation" vs. 
> > in all of the advertising materials.
> > 
> > i.e., we include it in the supporting documentation 
> > /usr/share/doc/PACAGE/copyright, which we have to include anyway.
> Some require it in the "end-user documentation" (Apache), which seems
> stronger.

That's a problem, then.

> (The copyright file isn't really for end users, since you
> shouldn't have to accept free licenses to use free software.)

Eh?  What does simple notification have to do with acceptance

I'm going to have to differ with you here.  The copyright file is for
everyone.  That we make it available in plain-text, uncompressed form
rather than in spinning, throbbing OpenGL-rendered 3D text over a
thumping dance music soundtrack is a feature, not a bug.

> The real intent of that wording seems to be eg. manuals.

It would be good to get clarification on this point from the ASF.

G. Branden Robinson                |    It's like I have a shotgun in my
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    mouth, I've got my finger on the
branden@debian.org                 |    trigger, and I like the taste of
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    the gunmetal. -- Robert Downey, Jr.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: