"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Personally, I would retain them as a courtesy to upstream; users are
> no more and no less free to modify or remove them than Debian is.
> The alternative -- to demand that all content other than license
> texts and other legal indicia must be arb
On 6/17/05, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> etc/{CENSORSHIP,copying.paper,INTERVIEW,LINUX-GNU,THE-GNU-PROJECT,WHY-FREE}
> >
> > only "copying.paper" sounds like a license; the rest are simply documents,
> > which must be DFSG-free to be i
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 06:04:20PM +0200, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> I'm surprised that someone thinks that there's any controversy on this
> point. As I understand it, the current situation is that, with the
> release of sarge, everything in Debian should be DFSG free, including
> programs, document
3 matches
Mail list logo
