On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:41:07AM +1100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote: > * Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-25 18:37]: > > Can you explain what the policy is for which non-freeness issues > > *will* be regarded as "sarge-ignore"? > ... > > It is difficult, from these data, to discern what exactly the policy > > for "sarge-ignore" and licensing issues is. > I'm afraid I cannot give you an answer to this. As you should know from > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200308/msg00010.html > or #97671, "sarge-ignore" is used and defined by the Release Manager.
Or, more canonically:
] Further to this, certain issues may be exempted from being considered
] release critical for sarge by the release manager. This is expressed
] by tagging the report "sarge-ignore"; this should not be done without
] explicit authorisation from the release manager.
] 1. DFSG-freeness
]
] Code in main and contrib must meet the DFSG, both in .debs and
] in the source (including the .orig.tar.gz)
]
] Documentation in main and contrib must be freely distributable,
] and wherever possible should be under a DFSG-free license. This
] will likely become a requirement post-sarge.
-- http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review!
-- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
pgpbOi1t5o3uq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
