Matthias Geiger wrote: > Well, the DFSG exits, we just don't have it mandating actions for packages > (which IMO should be discussed). > > I'd like to point out §5 here [1].
DFSG §5 concerns the *license* of the program. "No Discrimination" here means that the license must not restrict any person or group from using, modifying and redistributing the program. It doesn't concern discriminatory views held by the *authors* of the program. About "mandating actions for packages", I understand that DFSG violation bugs are RC. You aren't "forced" to do anything (see also Constitution 2.1.1) but if you don't, your package won't be part of a Debian stable release. But this is not a case of DFSG violation. Gerardo
