Hi Philipp, On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 02:24:41AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 09:13:42PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > + YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THIS SOFTWARE FOR MILITARY PURPOSES OR WITHIN > > + MILITARY ORGANIZATIONS! THIS INCLUDES ALSO MILITARY RESEARCH AND > > + EDUCATION! > > That doesn't really seem like something Debian can really meet or > > enforce... > > Hereby bringing this to the attention of the ftp-masters. fex is in main > but includes that clause on top of AGPL-3. > > Which probably means for one that it's no longer compatible with GPL code, > which might or might not be relevant, and, more severly, it's not compatible > with the DFSG.
after some discussion with upstream the problem is as follows: Upstream has ever since had this clause in his license file so this is no new requirement. Obvious up until now this has either been overlooked or not been a problem. The change from GPL to AGPL has thus nothing to do with his intention to not support terrorist activities and to ensure the broadest coverage possible he has ruled out all military. As I'm not seeing any chance of meeting DFSG criteria 5 and 6 with the above intention (which clearly is discriminating certain groups - even though personally I can perfectly well understand upstream's will on why this is) I'm herewith seeking ftpmaster assistance on coming forth with a solution. IOW, I'm out of ideas on how to solve the problem of the DFSG while respecting upstreams intended limitation. Is there any way we could formulate such limitation as upstream desires without breaking the DFSG? Unless someone can come forth with a wording that does cover both requirements I guess we'll be bound to removing F*EX from the archive - which IMHO would be a sad loss as there currently exsits no other product in Debian providing the same services as F*EX does. Thanks for your help. -- Best regards, Kilian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
