(FWIW, this is probably more of a d-project thing; d-legal is more about figuring out whether licenses are free and safe.)
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 12:24:58AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > > DebConf papers will not be distributed in main. Why not (and "says who")? If they're worth anything at all, they sure seem like a decent thing to want to package--much more so than a lot of what seems to be packaged these days. > I cannot fully understand why, but I take note of it. > Are you concerned that less papers would be submitted to DebConf6 with > such a rule? > In case you are: why aren't you similarly concerned that less packages > will be distributed in main, if we care "too much" about Freeness > issues? His argument appears to be "we don't *have* to do this, therefore we shouldn't", which isn't much of an argument. (FWIW, I don't have a strong opinion either way; I just happen to find Henning's arguments--at least, those you've quoted--to be empty.) FYI, a possible response might be: "we care about freeness, but we pick our battle, and our battle is Debian main". I care about starving children, but I don't donate the majority of every check to feed them: there are lots of good causes, and the fact that everybody has to pick and choose their causes doesn't mean people "don't care enough". (That said, I don't agree with that response: it should be no big deal for people to freely license their papers, so they can be packaged later in Debian. This isn't a big, difficult fight.) -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]