Michael Scheidell <scheid...@secnap.net> writes: > On 4/21/10 1:25 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: >> >> >> Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse quite obviously feels that they have >> captured enough fishes in the ocean and are making plenty of money now >> and so do not require all of the free advertising that inclusion of >> their source in Debian gives them. Quite obviously they complained >> and >> their stuff was withdrawn as a result. > > The DCC author would welcome Debian replacing the old, broken code > with something new.
That will only be accepted by Debian if the license were changed to be DFSG compliant[0], at which point it would be gladly re-introduced into Debian. I would even be happy to facilitate that process as a Debian Developer. > Or is it your debian folks just forgot to update it? My previous message detailed why it wasn't updated[1], a message that you replied to, more than once. Debian did not 'just forget to update it', rather it seems that you were the one who forgot something (the reason why it was not updated). In fact the whole thread here has continued on as a result of that very reason why Debian did not update it. I'll cite it again for you[2] "The Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse source carries a license that is free to organizations that do not sell filtering devices or services except to their own users and that participate in the global DCC network." This specifically violates DFSG #6. Its also worth noting here that the original Debian maintainer expressed frustration about the communication with upstream because, "he seemed to blacklist several ip ranges, including master's main mail server and murphy's [ed. note: these are Debian's mail servers] ip-range as well as the ip-range i ussualy [sic] used for mailing. So neither mailing him directly nor mailing to the mailing list was possible." [editor notes mine] > As was previously posted (by someone else) DCC is free for most > everyone, including ISP's who use it in their mail servers to protect > their own clients. There is free as in money, and then there is free as in freedom (libre), these are different things. > So, put your money where your mouth is. So the money is there, now what? > Why won't debian fix their broken RPM? Probably because Debian doesn't use RPMs... sorry I couldn't resist. The real reason is the one cited here, and in previous messages. > someone official from debian want to chime in? Since I am a Debian Developer, I may count as 'official' here. micah 0. http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines 1. http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/128332 2. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=380542
