Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Ken Arromdee
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Raul Miller wrote: > > The person who has the device doesn't neceessarily have the firmware, > > because > > the firmware can be removed. > The person doesn't have the device at that point -- only part of it. The same reasoning applies for both examples if you refer to the co

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Raul Miller
> > It's different because, when the firmware is built into the device, > > the person who has the device has the firmware. On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:41:31PM -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote: > The person who has the device doesn't neceessarily have the firmware, because > the firmware can be removed.

Re: which Debian section?

2004-10-24 Thread MJ Ray
On 2004-10-24 23:27:00 +0100 Oded Shimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] Having my program directly depend on MPlayer would force most users to either use dpkg --force, or install the package. ...or use an equivs package. http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/equivs

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Ken Arromdee
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Raul Miller wrote: > > > > Ignoring Brian's strange arguments about rodents, I can see no cases > > > > where the user has more freedom if the firmware comes from an eeprom > > > > rather than from a CD. > > > He can sell the device with the firmware in it, > > How's that diffe

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Raul Miller
> > > Ignoring Brian's strange arguments about rodents, I can see no cases > > > where the user has more freedom if the firmware comes from an eeprom > > > rather than from a CD. > On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > He can sell the device with the firmware in it, On Sun, Oct 24,

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Ken Arromdee
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > Ignoring Brian's strange arguments about rodents, I can see no cases > > where the user has more freedom if the firmware comes from an eeprom > > rather than from a CD. > He can sell the device with the firmware in it, How's that different? If

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Brian Thomas Sniffen
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:41:13AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: >>> Is this the case even if the firmware is in a flash chip attached to the >>> device? If the total amount of non-free software on a user's

Re: Preferred license for forums content - Part II

2004-10-24 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:28:12PM +0200, Sebastian Feltel wrote: > The new introductory statement will look like this: > --- > "All Postings published in the forums/databases of this website are -if > they were created or modifie

Re: which Debian section?

2004-10-24 Thread Oded Shimon
On Sunday 24 October 2004 18:31, Josh Triplett wrote: > debian-legal is indeed the appropriate list for such questions. Yup, so i noticed after skimming the archives after i sent my message :) > Your program requires a package outside of main for execution (and > should have a Depends for that rea

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Matthew Garrett
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:41:13AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> Is this the case even if the firmware is in a flash chip attached to the >> device? If the total amount of non-free software on a user's system is >> the same regardless, why are we conce

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:41:13AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The point is, some drivers DO require firmwares. I'd rather say: Some > > depend on firmware. In that case, if the firmware is non-free, the > > driver can't go in main. > Is this the cas

Preferred license for forums content - Part II

2004-10-24 Thread Sebastian Feltel
Hi, some time ago I asked [1] for the prefered license for a debian web forum. Now its time to force the license change for my forum [2] and so I want you to ask again if some plans I made are correct. - Changing license by date I want to change the license for postings which arrive after 01.01

Re: which Debian section?

2004-10-24 Thread Josh Triplett
Oded Shimon wrote: > Not sure if this is the best place to ask this: debian-legal is indeed the appropriate list for such questions. > I built a program, and am now working on a creating a Debian package for it. > the program is an MEncoder frontend, and it depends on MPlayer to work > (without

Re: which Debian section?

2004-10-24 Thread Michelle Konzack
Hello Oded, Am 2004-10-24 13:40:55, schrieb Oded Shimon: > Not sure if this is the best place to ask this: > > I built a program, and am now working on a creating a Debian package for it. > the program is an MEncoder frontend, and it depends on MPlayer to work > (without it, it would crash on s

which Debian section?

2004-10-24 Thread Oded Shimon
Not sure if this is the best place to ask this: I built a program, and am now working on a creating a Debian package for it. the program is an MEncoder frontend, and it depends on MPlayer to work (without it, it would crash on startup). MPlayer is not in the debian archives, from what I understa

Re: Academic Free License 2.1 -- free or not?

2004-10-24 Thread Francesco Poli
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:04:58 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote: > Francesco Poli wrote: > > > The software was legally distributed > > > to me, and that gives me some entitlements under copyright law. > > > > Which ones? > > Please explain (IANAL, hence I'm not so knowledgeable...). > > Most copyrig

Re: ITP some 13 years old code with unknown license

2004-10-24 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Atari game, and he said its OK. Of course I tried to contact >der Mouse, but without luck. And since "Mouse" is widely used >in computing, Google didn't return something usefull. You need to know what to look for... der Mouse is well known in some circles. :-) mailto:[EMA

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >The point is, some drivers DO require firmwares. I'd rather say: Some But, as I explained, this is not correct: hardware devices require firmwares, not drivers. -- ciao, Marco

Abwesenheitsnotiz: Hi

2004-10-24 Thread Riegert, Ulrich
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren Am 28. Oktober 2004 bin ich wieder im Hause. In dringenden Fällen wenden Sie sich bitte an Herrn Dr. Strüh Tel.: 07164/930173 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mit freundlichen Grüßen U. Riegert

Re: non-free firmware: driver in main or contrib?

2004-10-24 Thread Mike Hommey
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:41:13AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Is this the case even if the firmware is in a flash chip attached to the > device? If the total amount of non-free software on a user's system is > the same regardless, why are we concerned about how it's packaged? 'kay, this has a