discuss: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
Subject:
Re: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
From:
doug jensen ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2005 20:46:27 -0000
Message-Id: <20050310204554.GA25655@debian>
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:16:37PM -0800, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Rahul Sundaram ####@####.####
>
> > it should be trivially simple to check this up IMO.
> > Debian definitely should have a authoratitive list of
> > licenses that it considers "free"
>
> You may recall you and I discussing this exact point, here, in April 2004:
> It was (and is) my contention that Debian lacks any authoritative list
> -- and that one would be well advised to check skeptically the basis of
> the claimed or implied authority for any such list that someone might post.
>
> > if finding out which licenses Debian would include in its free
> > repository involved reading such documents and infering from it our
> > own opinions then its too complex for me.
>
> Ah, now _that's_ an easier problem, and can be resolved procedurally:
>
> 1. Convince a maintainer to submit a package.
> 2. Observe which collection he puts it in. Make sure you wait for
> any subsequent NMU (non-maintainer update) or administrative action
> that changes that.
> 3. Repeat.
>
> I'm being only a tiny bit facetious. See below.
>
> > Your answers are not the problem but the situation definitely is.
>
> It's not really that bad a situation. The worst that's likely[1] to
> happen is that some package ends up in a different collection from the
> one you expected. As Doug said in the 2004 discussion -- back when he
> agreed with my point -- the decision isn't whimsical: A Debian
> developer is required to apply DFSG to the decision, and that decision
> is subject if necessary to correction via others' NMUs, etc.
Correction, that is one reason why I don't agree with you. You are
saying how haphazard it is. Until now, that is.
>
> [1] Some software doesn't get accepted for even the non-free collection
> because it's judged to be not possible for Debian to lawfully
> redistribute, e.g., on account of licence conflict. That could likewise
> happen to documentation, in theory.
Not sure but I think that is the case already for a couple of HOWTOs.
I could check if it is important.
--
Doug Jensen
