>The author thinks it is sufficiently free and doesn't want to change it (see >previous mail). So can we include this or not? Any good arguments for >persuading the author that in fact the licence isn't free? part of this >software is needed by boot-floppies - just putting the software in non-free >isn't going to help this aspect as I presume it's no good having b-f >build-depends on something in non-free. Perhaps we could find te resources to >re-implement that bit...
I don't actually think the amount of resource required would be all that great. Does Aleph One have any spare cash to fund this kind of work? p.
