On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 00:06, Walter Landry wrote: > Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > First of all, requiring a source file rename is, I think, obviously OK; > > renaming "foo.c" to "bar.c" doesn't really affect your rights, and is > > mostly an annoyance (tracking down Makefile references and so on). > > Why is this obviously OK? DFSG #4 allows people to mandate the change > of the name of the work. Requiring name changes of files is too > granular.
It's not expressly forbidden or expressly allowed, so we have to figure out if it's OK or not. As I mentioned, it doesn't seem onerous as a requirement; just an mv/cp and a few Makefile edits. > What if the license required you to change the names of the > functions inside the files (this would be analogous to changing the > API, just as the LPPL wants you to do). Well, as I mentioned with the C include file example, this might not be free. > What if you had to change the > names of variables? That would depend, I suppose, similarly to the C include file example. How easy is it to change "int foo;" to "int bar;"? What if the variable involved was "errno" from the C library? > I think that the only people who are really authoritative are the > ftp-admins. They generally defer to the consensus of debian-legal, > though. They might listen to a direct order from the technical > committee and/or a General Resolution. Practically, yes. But if a ftp-admin decided to REJECT a package based on the license, the maintainer would likely have a hissy fit and appeal, perhaps to the TC, the DPL, or through a GR to the whole Debian community. The ftp-admin had better be able to point to evidence in that case, or his decision would be overturned. In that respect, the ftp-admin is like any other developer, except that ftp-admins have more power to act than everyone else does. For evidence that the maintainer still has clout, look at the current discussion. Suppose an admin decided that they had had enough, and pulled tetex out of woody and sid main. Do you think they would credibly get away with it before this discussion with the LaTeX people comes to a conclusion? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
