On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:28:38PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: > <after more fooling around getting the source packages for potato> > > The license you quote does seem free to me. Apparently it is new > with version 1.6 of picasm. The one in slink still has the non-free > license I found. > > The Debian changelog provides some clues as to why it is still in > non-free. The new license was added in a non-maintainer upload. > Presumably the one who did that decided that the package being in > non-free was not critical enough to move it to contrib behind > the back of the official maintainer (who apparently hasn't touched > the package for most of three years but has not officially orphaned > it, either).
What do we do in such circumstances ? hijack ? autoorphanization ? announcement ? This is important to have all packages being maintained.
