Re: Is redeclipse really non-free?

2012-08-26 Thread Camaleón
On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 14:22:06 -0700, Miga wrote: (please, no html posts, thanks) Hey there everybody, this is my first time posting to Debian mailing lists, so hopefully I'm posting this to the correct one. Can anybody explain why redeclipse is in contrib and redeclipse-data is in non-free?

Is redeclipse really non-free?

2012-08-25 Thread Miga
Hey there everybody, this is my first time posting to Debian mailing lists, so hopefully I'm posting this to the correct one. Can anybody explain why redeclipse is in contrib and redeclipse-data is in non-free? From what I know, redeclipse-data isn't non-free (uses licenses like CC-BY, CC-BY-SA

Re: Is redeclipse really non-free?

2012-08-25 Thread John Hasler
The OFL (Open Font License) is incompatible with the DFSG. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcg6k4pj@thumper.dhh.gt.org

Re: Is redeclipse really non-free?

2012-08-25 Thread Brian
On Sat 25 Aug 2012 at 14:22:06 -0700, Miga wrote: Basically what I'm asking is, can somebody help me confirm that redeclipse-data is actually non-free? If so, what's making it non-free? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=651752 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: Is redeclipse really non-free?

2012-08-25 Thread Bob Proulx
Brian wrote: Miga wrote: Basically what I'm asking is, can somebody help me confirm that redeclipse-data is actually non-free? If so, what's making it non-free? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=651752 Stated in that ITP log: This will go in non-free due to missing sources