discuss: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
Subject:
Re: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
From:
Rick Moen ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2005 19:47:46 -0000
Message-Id: <20050310194742.GP27314@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Rahul Sundaram ####@####.####
> I and possibly many others had the impression that the website is
> authoratitive. Now I know it is not as clear as that.
Rahul, it's instructive -- albeit unfortunately a fair amount of work --
to pretend as if you're a new Debian maintainer and determine what
statements are and are not authoritative and binding on such
maintainers. It's a bit time-consuming, but not that complex. In a
prior thread here, last April, when the subject came up before, I
outlined my attempt to do exactly that:
http://lists.tldp.org/index.cgi?1:mss:7165
The Policy Manual's requirement that maintainers put only DFSG-free
package in main and non-US/main _is_ a real requirement. So are any
General Resolutions and any formal determinations of the Debian Project
Leader on licensing issues. And so on. But boiled-down summaries of
public posting to the debian-legal mailing list are _not_ in any way
binding. They just aren't -- regardless of whose page they've been
shovelled onto.
That's a simple point: Doug just doesn't like it. Tant pis pour lui.
Maintainers are advised in the Policy Manual (section 2.2) that they
should _consult_ the debian-legal mailing list. That's the limit:
The list's role is advisory. The rest follows from that.
But don't take my word for it: Read the relevant sections of Debian's
governing documents for yourself.
