On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:18:53 +0100 (BST) MJ Ray wrote: > Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:59:16 +0100 (BST) MJ Ray wrote: > > > Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> > > > > Could someone explain to me why firebird is in main? > > > > > > Because some ftpmaster hit approve, no-one found a bad enough > > > bug to change it and this plan didn't happen yet: > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/03/msg00562.html > > > > In your opinion, what's the best course of action, at this point? > > > > File a serious bug against each firebird source package (firebird1.5 > > and firebird2.0), so that we can find out *why* the above-mentioned > > plan has not yet happened? > > I suspect it's not happened because ftpmasters decided to accept MPL, > but ask by emailing them first, not by filing a serious bug. Is <ftpmaster@d.o> the right address? Asking questions to that address does not seem to produce answers from fptmasters... See for instance http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00124.html > > > Anyone volunteers to do a more thorough analysis of > > the issues (I'm still quite in a rush, sorry)? > > What issues? The MPL/IPL's patent problems are not a problem if > firebird is not patented, the LEGAL file doesn't seem to exist in > firebird, the ftpmasters are willing to stand up for the source supply I think the requirement to keep source online for 6 or 12 months is non-free, even in case Debian could claim to comply with it (which I still doubt). > and Borland aren't harassing users with frivolous court cases. I think the choice of venue clauses are non-free, even in cases where there are no harassments going on (yet). [...] > If you are in a rush, please put this on your TODO rather than 'going > off at half-cock'. Well, I hope I am not the *only* person on this planet who cares about Debian, the SC, the DFSG, and licenses. I (re-)discovered what *I think* is a serious bug which should be fixed ASAP: since I was not finding enough time to do a complete analysis myself and file bug reports, I thought that some other debian-legal regular(s) could get interested and take care of the issue, if I raised it on the list... Apparently, I was wrong: debian-legal seems to be much different from how it was when I started to participate... :-( Disappointed. -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpzWmRYllKfi.pgp
Description: PGP signature