Re: summary of software licenses in non-free
Michael Banck dijo [Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 07:23:12PM +0100]:
> > I would advocate making this more prominent - This proposal is quite
> > good, and it would add expresiveness to tools such as vrms... But I
> > would like to see something like
> > /usr/share/doc/package/why_is_nonfree, stating the reason (a couple of
> > lines at least) so that our users have a better chance of seeing and
> > understanding it.
> > It has been suggested to put this in README.Debian - It would fit
> > there, yes... But I'd rather see it more prominent.
> Andrew Suffield pointed out in <20040110220021.GG892@suffields.me.uk>
> that one can just put the reason into /usr/share/vrms/reasons/$package,
> vrms already supports this. It wouldn't hurt to duplicate the reason
> somewhere in /usr/share/doc/$package though, I guess.
> Nobody objected to mass-bug-filing for adding those reasons there, so
> I'll advance on this in the next couple of days.
I am sorry, I had a number of personal things keeping me off my
regular mailing lists for the past couple of weeks.
I don't like this solution:
- We might all recognize vrms, but this information might be useful
for other packages. For example, a tool such as Aptitude, Dselect or
Synaptic might want to warn the users on why a package is listed in
- It brings to life /usr/share/vrms. How many people do have vrms
installed? Why should all have this extra directory brought into
existence if a single package (vrms) can be modified to look for the
reasons in another place?
- And for users who are not concerned with either having vrms or
Synaptic bug them but have a bit of extra time, someone might just
start wandering around /usr/share/doc, find and read this files. If
they are not in doc, they would be much less prominent.
Gunnar Wolf - email@example.com - (+52-55)5630-9700 ext. 1366
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF