On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 09:13:05PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes: >> to be implying that because he is a Debian developer, all of his contact >> with the rest of the community must be sanctioned by the DPL. (Or >> perhaps by you?) I certainly don't see anything wrong with bringing an >> issue to the attention of the FSF if he thinks there has been an >> oversight. If you ask me, it seems like a rather neighborly thing to do. > Did you ever consider contacting upstream before doing such > denouncement? Don't they have something to say? Why do you think you > cannot find a solution with them? I wonder at this vehemence. Isn't the FSF on "our side"? Do you believe that the FSF is a Gestapo that will clap the mldonkey maintainer in irons? Since the mldonkey project is using Savannah resources, I think it's quite reasonable that a DD asks for the FSF's help in persuading upstream to change their license -- as part of the process of finding a solution. RMS's response seems to be in line with this view. >> You are right that it is not *Debian's* business to worry about non-free >> software on the FSF's servers. But Debian != Bas, and Bas's business is >> his own. > You got it! It has nothing to do in a bug report log from our BTS: > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:17:21 +0200 > From: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es> > To: Bas Zoetekouw <bas@a-eskwadraat.nl> > Cc: rms@gnu.org, 154312@bugs.debian.org > Robert could have done it on his own without CC'ing the BTS. True. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that someone packaging this for Debian would not have an interest in the outcome of the FSF's discussions with upstream. If our priorities are our users and Free Software, then the freeness of software is always relevant to the BTS -- even though, as you rightly note, Debian as a whole has no business trying to dictate policy to Savannah. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpSJRsE2Agyy.pgp
Description: PGP signature