Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> At the very least, we could distribute them in a specific "patented" >>> section, with rules similar to non-free, and that we’d only mirror in >>> countries where it is not a problem. >> >> While we are at it, would be nice to have a section for DMCA-impaired >> software such as libdvdcss. > > How about this: > > - introduce a new section 'patented' > - packages in 'patented' must fulfill the requirements of the dfsg > - source packages in 'main' may produce binaries in 'patented' > - binary packages in 'main' must not depend on packages in 'patented' > > - source packages in 'main' may build-depend on packages in 'patented'
This is problematic for a self-buildable main everywhere, no ? > - source and binary packages in 'patented' may depend on package on > both 'main' and 'patented' > - source packages in 'patented' must not produce binaries in 'main' > - packages in 'contrib' and 'non-free' may additionally depend on > packages > in 'patented' Sounds good for the rest... Regards, OdyX -- Swisslinux.org − Le carrefour GNU/Linux en Suisse − http://www.swisslinux.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]