Re: Licence for a file in tstat: is it compatible with Debian?

2006-10-03 Thread MJ Ray
Sandro Tosi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OTOH you have a different problem: a four clauses BSD-like license is not compatible with GPL-licensed code, and this means that the package is not distributable at all. So, what do I have to do now? Should I get in touch with upstream asking to

Re: New bugs filed regarding non-free IETF RFC/I-Ds

2006-10-03 Thread Simon Josefsson
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 05:49:16PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: Some of these documents MAY be freely available -- check with the author -- but as far as I could see, in no case was this noted in the copyright file, so I'm assuming they are

Re: CC's responses to v3draft comments

2006-10-03 Thread Markus Laire
On 9/27/06, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since the CC licenses don't require distribution of the preferred form for making modification aka. source code, it is essential that downstream recipient can extract works for modification and redistribution without violating any law that protects

Are source packages required to be DFSG-free? (was: Re: New bugs filed regarding non-free IETF RFC/I-Ds)

2006-10-03 Thread Simon Josefsson
There is some discussion in one of the bug reports: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=390664 (please read it first) The problem is essentially, if I understood it correctly, whether Debian source packages [in main] must be DFSG-free or not, or whether it is sufficient that Debian

Re: Are source packages required to be DFSG-free? (was: Re: New bugs filed regarding non-free IETF RFC/I-Ds)

2006-10-03 Thread Roberto C. Sanchez
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 04:59:03PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: There is some discussion in one of the bug reports: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=390664 (please read it first) The problem is essentially, if I understood it correctly, whether Debian source packages