Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could the fact that Debian accepted the DLJ fast, without doing the > normal procedure, have anything to do with Ubuntu's collaboration with > Sun (also asked in the debian-legal thread)?
I don't know. I have no data to decide that. I tend to favour cock-up over conspiracy: I think the current DPL is a poor project manager (or was at that point in time, at least) and supported railroading this questionably-licensed Java into the archive, an obviously divisive act, so that he could get named on a Sun press release. > [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/05/msg00086.html I doubt this is going to be fixed soon - as a common opinion seems to be that only those who were involved in the decision are liable if this goes wrong (as they are the only parties who can have consented to the licence), many debian developers are ignoring it. With any luck, Sun will make good their pledge to relicense it under a free licence (not the CDDL, I hope) and make this bug obsolete. Thanks, -- MJ Ray - see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html North End, Lynn, Norfolk, England Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ IRC/Jabber/SIP: on request _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
