Bug#79538: FDL is missing from common-licenses
* Jim Lynch <email@example.com> [001215 07:04]:
> Perhaps one reason it's not a common license, is it's unknown whether
> the license is dfsg-free. I certainly don't know; there may be others
> like me:)
Does any of this really matter?
I'm all for adding any old blasted license to the common-licenses
package. Why not collect all the licenses in one place, to make
Heck, I'm all for throwing the MicroSoft EULA into common-license
package. No one in their right mind would release software with it as
their license, but we can include it too! (Well, probably not -- they
might get upset with us about copyright issues; cf bugtraq.)
Or, perhaps, more pragmatically -- if more than one package uses a
license, keeping a copy in common-license would allow for saving hard
drive space for those users with multiple of those packages installed --
and everyone else would lose perhaps 4k with each new license.
That doesn't seem too bad.
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all
really impressed down here, I can tell you.''