Re: Bug#227159: ocaml: Worse, the QPL is not DFSG-free
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 08:06:03PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > I don't know why, but Brian has been bothering me about claiming the QPL
> > is non-free. I agree with the emacs thing, and am working on a solution
> > to it when time permits, and upstream has also agreed to it in
> > principle, so this should be solved before the now imminent (whatever
> > this means for debian release cycle :) sarge release.
> >
> > Anyway, it would rightly surprise me if the QPL would be reveled
> > non-free after all this years of use and the KDE controversy it was
> > linked to, and i believe that we have more than just ocaml as QPLed
> > programs in debian. So i request the help of debian-legal to help me
> > clarify this thing, and either make an official statement that the QPL
> > is non-free, or shut Brian up, and let me back to work on my packages.
>
> debian-legal is currently analyzing the QPL, and working on a license
> summary. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg00157.html
> for the DRAFT summary, and feel free to offer your comments,
> suggestions, or statements of whether the draft represents your
> position. The consensus seems to be that the license is non-free, and
> the only thing left is to work out the full details of the summary. I
> am currently writing the second draft, based on the responses to the first.
Yes, that is what i have seen, and seriously, what i have seen is barely
reasonable, but i know i will again get flamed for this. Especially the
way Overfiend and co have treatened me in the past.
The desert island and chinese disident tests seem questionable to me,
and i have voiced that in a previous mail, but should probably respond
to the draft directly.
> It would certainly be reasonable to wait until the summary is completed
> before acting on this bug.
Yeah, and i fear that a solution to this will happen days before the
sarge release, and i asked to take actions, and remove it, while i have
no choice to search for another solution.
> Also, to the best of my knowledge, programs under only the QPL are rare
> in Debian.
So, what is the problem with that ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: