On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Raul Miller wrote: > > Please see: http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:27:47AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > The holes in that page are so large you could drive fleets of roadtrains > through them. I'm disregarding this as a troll. > I refer specifically to "you own that copy of the software", which > implies that you own that copy, and are free to do what you want with > it (imagine a car compant saying "you own this car, but you can only > drive it on these roads"). I'm disregarding most of this as a troll. [No one copyright's cars.] An analogy to a book or a cdrom would be quite a bit more relevant. > Also, the bit talking about how you may distribute it if it's in the > same layout as what a user would get if they installed it themselves. The implication is that distribution is a copyright issue. > If I install the program with the lovely 'cp' command, it may just > end up in a different spot... hmm... How is this different from any other case of software, where you legally own a copy? > Basically, Bernstein is a troll, and has no idea about how to play well with > other programs / people's ideas. I'm ignoring this as a troll. > > For inclusion in non-free, which is more significant: access to > > source code or 100% FHS compliance? > > Since not everything in non-free has source anyway, I'd vote for FHS > compliance. That's fine. [As I noted in my second message in this thread, the FHS compliance issue has another potential resolution.] Thanks, -- Raul
