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 20:54:38 -0000
Message-Id: <20050310205436.GZ25252@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Rahul Sundaram ####@####.####
> I dont call this easy really.
I _did_ say easiER. ;-> And I was being, as mentioned, slightly
facetious.
> Authors shouldnt have to become a debian maintainer just to know
> whether their documents are acceptable to debian or not.
Just to make sure we're clear on this: Absent unlikely situations such
as licence conflict that would preclude inclusion entirely, the only
consequence would be uncertainty over whether the documents would go
into main (/ non-US/main) versus non-free.
> The number of people who have access to the net to download non-free
> documents is significantly lower than the number of people who can
> copy a CD in my region.
This is quibbling a bit, but just for the sake of completeness: The
Official Debian CD images are hardly the only way to install Debian.
In fact, I maintain a list of dozens of such ways. See: "Installers"
on http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Debian
For example, the Libranet 2.8.1 ISO includes quite a number of packages
classified as non-free, and yet is freely redistributable.[1] It's a
perfectly fine installer (if you're on IA32) that is highly compatible
with Debian 3.0/sarge. (I am not saying any of the packages deemed
non-free consist solely of documentation; I'm just citing Libranet to
illustrate the general point that there are other highly satisfactory
ways to install Debian other than Official Debian ISOs.)
[1] See: "Libranet Licensing" on http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Debian
