Re: License question about regexplorer

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Francesco Poli <frx@winstonsmith.info> wrote:

> Wait, the QPL (with no additional permission and a choice of venue)
> is *not* DFSG-free (many long discussions were hold on debian-legal last
> summer, IIRC).

There's disagreement over that. 

> Based on what has been stated and on
> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/r/regexplorer/regexplorer_0=
> .1.6-12/regexplorer.copyright,
> Regexplorer seems to not comply with the DFSG.

There's a moderate number of QPLed packages in the archive.

> I think a bug should be filed immediately...

Could we at least wait until post-Helsinki? There's a session on the
DFSG planned, and it would be helpful to gain a better idea of what the
not-on-legal part of the project think about these sort of issues.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org