Re: Bug#550860: ITP: gnaughty -- downloader for adult content
- To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#550860: ITP: gnaughty -- downloader for adult content
- From: Patrick Matthäi <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:21:18 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 4AD64EDE.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <20091013155801.GA4050@entrouvert.com> <20091013214438.0e264427@raptor> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20091014183014.GA3084@lisa> <20091014185248.GC19270@nabiki.intranet.nul-unu.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <4AD62A80.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Philipp Kern schrieb:
> On 2009-10-14, Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> But also if the _free_ software is for downloading etc. pay-only content
>>> like music, I do not think that it has to enter contrib, because it does
>>> not has got a real dependenie on non-free stuff.
>> Yeah, it's a bit of a marginal case. We have, for instance, Perl modules
>> to talk to the Amazon APIs in main, although in most of those cases the
>> API is relatively open and some other sites also implement it.
> The appearance of Eucalyptus is pretty recent, though. So you'd need to
> wait until a free service of an API gets released? How feature complete
> does it need to be? If I release a "compliant" porn directory with only one
> pic, would that be appropriate? And I could easily make it non-porn too.
> zsnes used to be in contrib, but somebody made the case that there could
> be, in fact, free roms, because the way how to program the box is not
> exactly secret anymore. (If they would be buildable on Debian is another
> question.) It lives in main now and my gut feeling is that it's the right
> thing to do, given that the code base is free to modify, share and gives
> you the usual rights of a free software license (here: GPL2).
Please move this whole discussion to debian-legal now.
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards,
GNU/Linux Debian Developer
Always if we think we are right,
we were maybe wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----