Le Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 10:39:04PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : > Le Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:05:34PM +0100, Torsten Werner a écrit : > > Am 27.01.13 02:04, schrieb Charles Plessy: > > >Torsten, do you konw what is the FTP team's position on this ? > > > > Such version upgrades has been accepted some years ago but I forgot > > the packages names. > > Thanks for the information; I upgraded the Debian wiki accordingly. > > http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses?action=diff&rev2=57&rev1=56 > > Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike (CC-BY-SA) v3.0 > > In contrast to the CC-SA 1.0 license, version 3.0 is considered to be > compatible to the DFSG. In addition, the version 2.0 and 2.5 are > transitively > compatible because of clause 4b that allows redistribution of derivative > works > under later versions of the license. (see > https://lists.debian.org/510685ae.4000...@twerner42.de)
Dear FTP team, I found #675435 where it was written that CC-BY-SA-2.0 was not suitable for Debian, and now I am confused. Could you let us know your position on the possiblity to accept CC-BY-SA-2.0 by upgrading it to 3.0 through its clause 4b ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130225134638.ga3...@falafel.plessy.net
