Re: Debtags facet for classification non-free packages
Thanks for the response and comments.
>> Enrice Zini suggested more elegant system on:
>This is better, but misses quite a few common cases. OTTOMH, there are
>also restrictions on distributing adapted versions,
I think this could be marked by ...:change
>making private changes,
In my original proposal it would be marked by no-source,
in this probably with :change. Yes, it should be mentioned in description.
>arbitrary termination clauses, indemnification, clickwrap
if those concern use (i.e. use is not dfsg free), then use :use,
if those concern distribution, ...
>and restricting other unrelated software.
Restrictions of unrelated software could be done by :dist, when the
restrictions would be on software distributed with it, and :use when the
unrelated sw is restricted where the sw runs.
>I'm disappointed that so much effort is being made to encourage use
I understand this opinion, but for example GFDL documentation was
"free enough" a couple of months ago, and now it is in the same category
as for example rar, only because the majority opinion changes. And in contrib,
there is among free sw depending on nonfree even really nonfree flashplugin.
Everyone can have his/her own opinion, what is free enough for him/her.