> > > Inspired by a recent bug report, I started taking another look > at > Chromium's current licensing situation, and it seems like > there's been a > lot of improvement. A lot of the problems I used to know > about are > gone. Using Debian's copyright file as a sort of guide, I > went looking > for files with bad licensing, and didn't have any luck -- a > lot of the > files that Debian classifies as "unknown" are autogenerated, > or have > good license headers that were just missed by whatever script > they're > using. The bug report that we link to in NONFSDG has seen a > lot of > progress since, including at least one update this year. > > Is anybody interested in taking a deeper look at Chromium's > current > status to see if there might be a way to include it now? I > remain loyal > to Mozilla-based browsers myself, but I know a lot of users > are > interested in Chromium, so it would be nice if that was an > option free > distros could provide. > > -- > Brett Smith > License Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation > > Support the FSF by becoming an Associate Member: > http://fsf.org/jf > > > fyi >
what does "FYI" stand for? :O -- Jorge Araya Navarro Universitario, idealista y pseudo-activista del Software Libre. Siquirres, Limón, Costa Rica. http://swt.encyclomundi.net Diaspora*: http://diasp.org/u/shackra identi.ca: http://parlementum.net/sweet Jabber: [email protected] Skype: ¡De ninguna manera, tras de privativo, te espían!. el software privativo en GNU/Linux, al igual que en Windows o en MacOs, te hace un ser no-libre. Deja de engañarte, ¡¡despierta ahora!!: http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html http://replicant.us/about/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabolagnulinux.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
