> One result of the discussion about tinyows was that OGC schemas don't fall > under the Software Notice but the Document Notice. This makes them > non-free > (no modification) and tinyows had to move to non-free. > I am afraid that pycsw has to do this as well.
That seems to be the wrong way around. The OGC schemas fall under the Software Notice as documented in the OGC LegalFAQ , the testcases appear to fall under the Document Notices (although the CITE test may have a different license than Document or Software Notice, I've never received feedback from OGC on my questions). To adress the TinyOWS issue, upstream has moved the testcases to a separate repository and won't include it in tarball at the next release. This should allow TinyOWS to move to main after the package is updated to strip the testcases as is done in the upstream git repo. If the FTP masters consider the OGC schemas to fall under the Document Notice despite what the OGC LegalFAQ says, then we need to move a lot of GIS packages to non-free because they also contain the schemas.  http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/legalfaq#DTD Kind Regards, Bas _______________________________________________ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkgfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel