On Sun, 03 Jun 2007, Anthony Towns wrote: > debian-devel re-added. > On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 21:50:15 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote: > > > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 10:54:36AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > > > > and to the best of my knowledge, works licensed solely under the > > > > CDDL have never been accepted in main.[1] > > > star | 1.5a57-1 | oldstable | source, alpha, arm, [...] > > > star | 1.5a67-1 | stable | source, alpha, amd64, [...] > > > http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/s/star/star_1.5a57-1/star.copyright > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=350624 > > Quoting from the bug log, Anthony Towns wrote: > > | The CDDL mightn't be the best license in the world, and isn't GPL > > | compatible, but it's still DFSG-free. Closing this bug with this > > | message. > > I do *not* agree that the CDDL meets the DFSG, especially when a choice > > of venue is in place. > > That a poster to debian-legal doesn't think a license meets the DFSG > isn't particularly useful information, and is even less so when that > poster isn't a DD, a maintainer or someone in the n-m queue.
It's not like there aren't DDs who feel that it isn't DFSG free; Steve Langasek and myself have consistently argued against it, and I doubt we're the only two. That said, can the ftpmaster who approved the inclusion of star in main speak up and give their rationale? Don Armstrong -- Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you really want to test his character, give him power. -- Abraham Lincoln http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]