On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 15:36, Matija Šuklje wrote: > Dne petek 8. oktobra 2010 ob 20:36:35 je Taco Hoekwater napisal(a): >> * because it is not free software according to the Debian guidelines; >> * because it is a binary update; > > At a first (and second) glance, I don't feel exactly comfortable with these > two. Would you care to explain them a bit more? > > Does "not free according to Debian" mean that it *is* free according to FSF > and/or OSI?
I'm not sure about these, but examples are: - metric files of commercial fonts - cow fonts (the font is free to use, but one may not modify it) - documentation of ConTeXt (because the sources are missing, PDFs are not considered "free enough") - etc. > Binary updates as in closed source or as in e.g. pictures? Usually that would be metapost and luatex (so it's neither closed source not pictures). TeX Live's policy is to update the binaries only once per year and Taco wants them to be tested faster than that. Mojca ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
