Re: libcwd/non-free
martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> writes:
> also sprach Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> [2005.05.24.0344 +0200]:
>> libcwd is licensed under the QPL, about which there was an extended
>> debian-legal thread a while back and non-free seemed to be the
>> consensus (he says warily, not particularly liking trying to summarize
>> debian-legal).
> I don't think consensus ever existed on debian-legal. For what it's
> worth, I disagree with you.
I was actually basing that in part on your comment in the bug log about
"debian-legal deciding," so in that case I will certainly withdraw the
conclusion. I read some of the discussion, but I don't remember it well
enough to know whether there was a consensus or not.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: