On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 16:14 +0930, Karl Goetz wrote: > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:16:31 +0200 > Sam Geeraerts <sam...@elmundolibre.be> wrote: > > > Sam Geeraerts schreef: > > > Karl Goetz schreef: > > >> I have changed the status of the bug[1]. Its now NEEDSINFO, > > >> BLOCKER, target release deltah (2.3). > > >> > > >> I'll adjust the status when we get word back from the FSF as to > > >> their opinion. > > >> > > >> Sam/Benedikt, have either of you emailed the FSF yet? > > > > > > I assume nobody has up until now, so I've just sent them an email. > > Hi Sam, > > > > The team working on gNewSense are trying to decide what to do > > about the > > amslatex software. > > > > My short answer is: include it :) . > > > > Considering that AMS probably own all > > the code in the package, > > > > They do. > > > > is this an acceptable way of dealing with the situation? > > > > It's certainly suboptimal, but I think it would be a terrible > > overreaction to exclude amslatex just because of that. Let's hope > > they fix all their files soon. > > I see. > Then I think we can leave it where it is. I still think we should > include an updated licence file for it though; and a reference back to > this discussion. Thoughts on that? > kk
I believe an updated license must be posted to clarify on the situation, linking to this discussion. It would be a shame to remove an important package due to a petty situation, especially considering gNS 2.3 is around the corner. The most important thing in this situation is that no-one forgets about the package and continues to pester ams about the license. I see no problems with continuing to include amslatex currently. -- Russell Currey (ruscur/rusty) Noob programmer, FSF member and gNewSense contributor http://identi.ca/ruscur _______________________________________________ gNewSense-dev mailing list gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
