>>>>> "Ansgar" == Ansgar 🙀 <ansgar@debian.org> writes:
Ansgar> Hi,
Ansgar> On Mon, 2025-05-05 at 14:27 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> If I wanted to package up my classifier state and distribute it
>> under a free software license, I think it should be DFSG free. I
>> think that to satisfy the DFSG I would need to include all the
>> training data I still had and any scripts I used.
Ansgar> And the training data would have to be under a DFSG-free
Ansgar> license. I doubt phishing or spam mail comes with proper
Ansgar> licensing; even ham doesn't do this (what are the license
Ansgar> terms of this mail?). So if you were required to include
Ansgar> training data it wouldn't be possible even for fairly boring
Ansgar> classifiers.
Thank you. I should have caught that.
I guess even under my proposal option, packaging the classifier might be
tricky. If I deleted the training data and no longer had it, then I
think under my option, the classifier could be DFSG free.
If I retained the training data, then ftpmaster would need to decide
whether I as upstream had a more preferred form of modification than
the rest of the world. (My understanding is we approach upstreams with
well-justified suspicion when they have source-like things that the rest
of the world does not have, and I tried to capture that in my option.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature