[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#597237: live-manual: includes non-free files



On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 16:37:56 +0200 rama@snail.org.uk wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 11:39:46 +0200, Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it>
> wrote:
> 
> > A decision must be taken and then all the copyright holders must be
> > tracked down, contacted and asked to agree to the re-licensing.
> 
> I'd suggest such a decision be appended to the upcoming manual's toDo
> <http://live.debian.net/devel/live-manual/todo/>
> Updated toDo will help explain to the copyright holders too.

Please note that we are talking about the Debian website
<http://www.debian.org> and its copyright notice and license
<http://www.debian.org/license>.

Hence I would tend to think that the Debian Live Manual todo list
<http://live.debian.net/devel/live-manual/todo/> is *not* the most
appropriate place for talking about the re-licensing of the Debian
website...

> 
> If its (re)licencing 'our own stuff' - so be it. 
>    
> > If you are willing to help me in generating a reliable list of
> > copyright holders for the Debian website (I think the place to look at
> > is the WWW CVS), I can draft a standardized e-mail message to send to
> > each one of them and collect their replies (those replies should be
> > sent to the e-mail address of bug #238245 or maybe #388141).
> 
> Yes willing to help. 
> I'll mail you once I start to locate enough copyright holders.

I think we should start this discussion over on the bug log of #238245,
where it really belongs.
So, if you are willing to help in generating a reliable list of
copyright holders for the Debian website, please say so here and I'll
move the discussion to the bug log of #238245.

> 
> [...]
> > disappointed by the lack of strictness with which the Debian SC (or
> > even the law) is complied with within the Debian Project.   :-(
> 
> Personally I'm not happy about the position on GFDL - but thats an
> unrelated matter I guess.

I am personally convinced that the right outcome should have been
Option 1 "GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases",
but you're right that this is another story...

> 
> All the best,

The same to you!

-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/progs/scripts/pdebuild-hooks.html
 Need some pdebuild hook scripts?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpT0zQlSmTcp.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: