discuss: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
Subject:
Re: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final
decision
From:
"Y Giridhar Appaji Nag" ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2005 08:27:34 -0000
Message-Id: <50183.59.92.138.192.1110443254.squirrel@secure.symonds.net>
David Lawyer said:
>
> As far as I know, Debian doesn't have any non-free packages anymore, at
> least not in their new versions. It's about time! I just downloaded
Debian still has non-free packages. On my up-to-date unstable system
$ cat
http.us.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_non-free_binary-i386_Packages |
grep 'Package:' | wc -l
284
There was talk about nonfree.org, but the packages in non-free in the
Debian archives are still maintained by the package maintaines.
> the regular package and it said during installation (on the screen) that
> it was removing my non-free stuff. But, surprise surprise, the non-free
Could this be because you removed "non-free" from your sources.list?
> docs now seem to be in the standard doc packages: doc-linux and
> doc-linux-html. So according to Debian, everything we have is OK (I
doc-linux-nonfree-html - Linux HOWTOs in HTML format (non-free)
doc-linux-nonfree-text - Linux HOWTOs in ASCII format (non-free)
> said OK, not free). So let's say nothing about Debian in the Author
> Guide since they are accepting everything we have in the same package.
>
> David Lawyer
>
> PS: In view of the above, the questions of Debian governance are a moot
> point as far as the Author Guide is concerned. But I've seen some
> things in the past regarding Debian policy which I've been quite
> critical of, so I would not necessarily discount what Rick Moen said.
>
> BTW, the new packages are both version 2004.11-l. One is text and the
> other html. They replace the obsolete non-free packages per the package
> list. I use the "testing" packages.
Giridhar
--
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag | http://www.appaji.net/
