Hello, On Thu 23 Apr 2020 at 01:09PM +03, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 09:30:55PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: >> On Tue 10 Mar 2020 at 06:32PM +01, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: >> >> > Its CONTRIBUTING.md [3] adds: "Subject to applicable licensing rules, >> > the repository content may be re-used freely, including the creation >> > and publication of derivative works." >> > In my reading this complies with DFSG. It's free to redistribute, >> > source code is available and allows publication of derived works. It >> > doesn't discriminate any persons, groups or fields of use. It doesn't >> > restrict other software even. >> > But of course, I would like to hear your opinion Sean and probably from >> > Jack. >> >> Based on what I've seen so far it is not clear to me that it's >> DFSG-free. The various files you reference contain links to various >> policies, which might supercede the text you quote from CONTRIBUTING.md >> (as "applicable licensing rules"). > > So what is the way forward you suggest? > Asking someone (who?) for advice? > RC bug also against p11-kit? > ...??? Well, didn't the bug submitter suggest an alternative header, which is DFSG-free? I'm afraid I don't know the details of this package; I just tried to assess the freeness of a particular file as this was requested. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
