Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Package: xserver-xorg (optional; Debian X Strike Force et al.) [xorg-x11/6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 ; =] [add/edit comment] > 211765 [ ] xfree86: material under GLX Public License and SGI Free Software License B is not DFSG-free > > As far as I can tell, the philosophy of the most recent GR is that Debian should > look for the "spirit" of the license -- and assume that licensors don't really > mean what they say when they say things which contradict the spirit. While I > think this is legally stupid, it is exactly what Adeoato said when he said that > he didn't believe that the GFDL actually contained the restrictions on encryption > etc. which it contains if read literally. As far as I can tell, the most recent GR states no more and no less than the idea that the GFDL should be considered DFSG-free without unmodifiable parts. Let's not compound the insanity by attempting to extrapolate these results to other licenses. > Package: libnss-ldap (extra; Stephen Frost) [libnss-ldap/238-1.1 ; =] [add/edit comment] > 199810 [ ] [NONFREE-DOC:RFC] Includes non-free documentation (RFC2307) > > More unmodifiable material. The "do what I mean not what I say" philosophy promoted > by the recent GR may mean that this should not be considered unmodifiable, however. > I'm not sure. See above, and also note that the GR specifically proscribed unmodifiable material. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature