At Fri, 27 Aug 2010 18:51:33 +0300, Yavor Doganov <ya...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Paul O'Malley wrote: > > On 27/08/10 01:29, Dmitry Samoyloff wrote: > > > Our abuse of Savannah: http://savannah.gnu.org/support/?107429 > > > > > > Well, I understand "we're generally not prepared to host a > > > complete distro", the bandwidth and such, but the "legal checks" > > > have no sense to me in this > > While all packages in gNS should be completely free (modulo bugs yet > to be discovered), not all of them are GPL-compatible. Savannah has a > requirement all software to be GPL-compatible, and all documentation > to be GFDL-compatible.
Oops, I see. Then this is a problem. Savannah's licensing politics is absolutely right (this is a GNU project after all), but it's obviously in conflict with distribution of general-purpose GNU/Linux distros. What amazes me is why we've not realized this earlier :-) > > the gnu project - that is software that is GPL, not all free software > > which could have other licences > > No. GNU packages are official packages maintained and released under > the GNU project's umbrella. Most of them are GPL, but some are under > other licenses (LGPL, AGPL, or Modified BSD like ncurses' license). I think Paul meant exactly this incompatibility of policies. I've just didn't realized it right away :-) -- I'm an FSF member -- Help us support software freedom! <http://www.fsf.org/jf?referrer=7253> _______________________________________________ gNewSense-dev mailing list gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
