Le Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 02:08:29PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit :
> On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 00:35 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > 3) Is there a benefit of allowing non-free files to be distributed together
> > with the source of the Debian system ?
>
> Have you considered the harm? It means
On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 00:35 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> 3) Is there a benefit of allowing non-free files to be distributed together
> with the source of the Debian system ?
Have you considered the harm? It means that users can no longer assume
that whatever is in the source packages can be dis
Hello again everybody,
I did not have much time recently, so here is a summary email that tries to
answer in a single message all comments that I received in public or private.
1) About the exhaustive reproduction of all copyright notices.
I have the feeling that there is a consensus that we d
Hi,
On 24/01/10 15:47, Charles Plessy wrote:
The Debian binary packages contain an exhaustive summary of the licenses of the
files it contains. This summary also contains a reproduction of the copyright
notices when the license require it. Additional documentation is encouraged but
not necessary
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 1:47 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> 2) The non-free files that we remove from the upstream sources.
Is mailing upstreams or writing debian/rules get-orig-source really so
problematic that you feel this is needed? The former is usually very
little work (and should be preferre
Hi Charles,
On Montag, 25. Januar 2010, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > In other words, just blatently ignore the bit of the DFSG that says
> > that programs must include source. Well, that explains it :-/
> Yes, exactly.
Thanks for clarifying.
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: Thi
On Mo, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:28:01 (CET), Luk Claes wrote:
>> Yes, exactly. In this draft GR I propose to ignore some DFSG-non-free
>> files, which includes sourceless files. Our social contract only
>> stipulates that the Debian sytstem must be DFSG-free. We already have
>> a non-free section for the
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:47:41PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> 2) The non-free files that we remove from the upstream sources.
Since you are a DD, I suppose you have read the social contract. What is
its first item ? Ah, yes ! "Debian will remain 100% free".
Are you suggesting a GR to change o
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:28:01AM +0100, Luk Claes a écrit :
>> And who in their right mind do you expect to vote for ignoring DFSG
>> non-freeness, people that want to leave the project?
>
> For the record, I will not answer in this thread to other posts that are
> insult
Le Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 08:28:01AM +0100, Luk Claes a écrit :
>
> And who in their right mind do you expect to vote for ignoring DFSG
> non-freeness, people that want to leave the project?
For the record, I will not answer in this thread to other posts that are
insulting, question people's mental
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:42:07AM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
>> Charles Plessy
> H> > Le Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:56:36PM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
Charles Plessy
> According to our social contract, “We promise that the Debian system and
> all
> its components
Le Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:42:07AM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
> Charles Plessy
H> > Le Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:56:36PM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
> > > Charles Plessy
> > > > According to our social contract, “We promise that the Debian system
> > > > and all
> > > > its components will be free accord
Charles Plessy
> Le Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:56:36PM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
> > Charles Plessy
> > > According to our social contract, “We promise that the Debian system and
> > > all
> > > its components will be free according to [the DFSG].” [...]
> >
> > Wow, that's a twist. So how do you g
Le Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:56:36PM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
> Charles Plessy
>
> > According to our social contract, “We promise that the Debian system and all
> > its components will be free according to [the DFSG].” My understanding of
> > this
> > is that the Debian system, our binary packages
Charles Plessy
> [...] my personal conclusion that this time could be
> better spent for other efforts. I therefore propose to make these
> practices optional. Since it is a major change in our traditions, I propose
> to make a GR to make sure that there is a consensus.
As will become clear, I di
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but does this really really really
> need a GR?
If it could be arranged, a way to avoid the GR would be to have the
ftpmasters publicly express (ideally in this discussion thread) their
position in agreement with one of Charles's prop
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:47:41PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> a significant part of the time dedicated to make and update Debian packages is
> spent in making an exhaustive inventory of the copyright attributions of the
> distributed work, and to clean the upstream original sourc
Please sign your message if you want to propose a GR.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Dear all,
a significant part of the time dedicated to make and update Debian packages is
spent in making an exhaustive inventory of the copyright attributions of the
distributed work, and to clean the upstream original sources from files that
have no impact on the binary packages we distribute. Af
19 matches
Mail list logo
