* Glenn L McGrath ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050206 00:25]:
I understand that the DFSG is a Guideline, those guidlines are
open to interpretation, and debian legal is seen as the authoritive
place to interperate the DFSG in new or changing conditions.
No, debian-legal is _not_ authoritive. However,
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 18:40:14 -0500 Glenn Maynard wrote:
You're saying that Debian should maintain an exhaustive list of
non-free restrictions, that (presumably) adding to that list should be
require a GR, and that no restrictions not on that list should be
considered free until voted on.
Glenn L McGrath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think if a licence has been accepted as complying with the Open Source
Definition, then the burden of proof should be on on the people who want
it excluded from debian. [...]
You think debian should be bound by a buggy derived project's decisions?
For
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is an interesting opinion, but I can't see which part of the DFSG
supports it.
The DFSG also doesn't tell us that we should not distribute too buggy
software - but we still try to avoid release such packages.
But still this does not make buggy packages not
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 12:26:16PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is an interesting opinion, but I can't see which part of the DFSG
supports it.
The DFSG also doesn't tell us that we should not distribute too buggy
software - but we still try to avoid release
Package: python
Severity: serious
The license for the Python profiler[0] does not allow it to be copied or
modified independently of other Python programs. This is a violation of
DFSG #3 (and also is just stupid). This bug affects likely every version
of Python in Debian (and that ever was in
Scripsit Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is an interesting opinion, but I can't see which part of the DFSG
supports it.
I've often wondered which part of the DFSG supports the notion that
the right to create modified versions must be available even to people
who don't want to pay money to
Scripsit Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*D R A F T*
Debian licence summary of the Common Public License version 1.0
For the record, I'm withdrawing this draft. I still think it is a
reasonable accurate description of the consensus, but I have been
convinced that aiming for
8 matches
Mail list logo
