Hi AJ, On Monday, 22 May 2006, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 06:14:51PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote: > > On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 04:18:44PM -0500, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Right, but again, why bringing the package with a bad license into the > > archive first? > > Because non-free is for "bad" licenses in the sense that they don't meet > the DFSG, and because the Sun license is not "bad" in the sense that it > causes any problems that we cannot deal with.
"Bad" as in "undistributable"? Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
