On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 02:49:14PM +0100, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:
Ok, I know I am a bit late, but since I recently got my Debian
developer status and this is exactly what I asked for in my mail on
2001-01-01, I second this.
Are 2 seconds (this should be the 2. second on this phrasing if I
have
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 09:20:35AM -0800, Pete Lypkie wrote:
Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restricted
license must also be stored on non-us, since the non-us server
[...]
By the way, what does restricted license mean in this context?
Surely even if the
On 20010111T010726+0100, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:
I am now about 2 - 3 days away from my first upload of freeswan. Should it go
into net (instead of non-US) now ? :-)
No.
A proposal does not automatically mean a policy change.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] %
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 04:16:18PM -0800, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
This is a slightly updated changed to reflect comments from people.
Debian developers can second this proposal for inclusion in the
policy text.
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free
On 11 Jan 2001 01:29:14 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
...
Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restrictied
license also need to be stored on non-us, since that is located
in a country where it is not allowed to patent
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Marco d'Itri wrote:
But is it non-US/main or non-US/non-free?
non-US/main, since the license to the software itself is free.
But if I don't misunderstand chapter 7 (and 8) of the GPL a program
licenced under the GPL that is threatened
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
non-US/main, since the license to the software itself is free.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 02:47:57PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
But if I don't misunderstand chapter 7 (and 8) of the GPL a program
licenced under the GPL that is threatened by a patent
Raul Miller writes:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
non-US/main, since the license to the software itself is free.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 02:47:57PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
But if I don't misunderstand chapter 7 (and 8) of the GPL a program
licenced under the GPL that
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 04:27:37PM -0800, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Okay, hopefully the final language change:
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code must be stored on
the non-us server because of export
This would be non-DFSG if we couldn't distribute it at all.
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 11:17:05PM -0800, Seth David Schoen wrote:
You can certainly say this _archive_ is only for the use of residents
of the following countries and even try to enforce that, as long as
you don't actually try to
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 10:06:41AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Better English:
Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restricted
license must also be stored on non-us, since the non-us server
is located in a country where patenting algorithms is not
permitted.
By
Previously Wichert Akkerman wrote:
* DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
Extra info: those 7 are Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan
and
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
* DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
Of course that raises the question: What can Debian do to prevent export
to one of
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 12:51:03 -0800, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
In light of this I'm proposing to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian
policy to say:
Yes! IMHO it's definitely time to make it possible for packages in the
regular main archive to support crypto (mozilla, w3m, lynx, links,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:10:55PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
* DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
Of course that
Previously Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
I was of the understanding that we would also have to notify the US of what is
on our site.
We only need to tell them that our site has crypto stuff from what I
understand.
Wichert.
--
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
...
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
on the non-us server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
So for the export restrictions only a non-US/non-free will be needed.
Programs which use
Robert Thomson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:10:55PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
* DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
one of 7 countries which are on a special
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
So for the export restrictions only a non-US/non-free will be needed.
crypto export restrictions, yes. Right.
That means if you use an algorithm that is patented in Germany the package
will be in non-us? You better rename this non-US to patented/main and
add the
Robert Thomson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 10:41:39PM +, Tim Haynes wrote:
Robert Thomson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So long as you don't mail a CD, cross a border, or force-feed to a mirror
in one of the 7 victim countries, then you're fine.
But, if you don't mind me being
This is a slightly updated changed to reflect comments from people.
Debian developers can second this proposal for inclusion in the
policy text.
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
on the
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
You could just devolve it to the maintainers of the packages in question.
It's not a great deal different from deciding if a package belongs in
non-free, main, or cannot be put in debian at all.
But ftpmaster verifies that as well, that's why it takes a while
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
...
Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restrictied
license also need to be stored on non-us, since that is located
in a country where it is not allowed to patent algorithms.
...
Any examples of such countries?
If this
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
Any examples of such countries?
See an earlier post I made, that listed them all.
* Tell all the FTP mirrors of non-US that must of them are no longer
allowed to ship non-US (e.g. ftp.de.debian.org is located in Germany
where it's not 100% forbidden to
24 matches
Mail list logo
