Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 02:21:17PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 22:31 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: I knew I haven't quote enough parts of DFSG: 5. Works that do not meet our free software standards We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Paul Wise a écrit : On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:50:40PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: An example of such a package is glibc (bug#382175). I don't think that removing SUNRPC support (and with it NIS, NFS and more) is a

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Robert Millan
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 10:31:34PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Which means that as per SC #4 you're welcome to package those firmware blobs and provide them in the non-free repository. That's exactly what I meant, instead of simply dropping support of hardware, as you suggested a few

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Robert Millan
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 08:24:01AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Common guys, they are simply refusing to do the work which is their rights, but they will accept patches. Some bugs are opened for 4 years, and I still do not see any patch to provide a loading firmware mechanism. On the

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

2008-10-22 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 02:17:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 22:47 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: Doing so would be a violation of basic NMU policy. The claim was, hey, nobody is stopping anyone from fixing it, if it's not fixed, it's lame for people to complain, they

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Tue, Oct 21 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: And you're comfortable with ftp-master ruling DFSG-iness through NEW then ? I don't really see the difference. I would be uncomoftable with ftp-masters willfully allowing DFSG violations in main without ratification from the project as a

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:15:55PM +, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Tue, Oct 21 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: And you're comfortable with ftp-master ruling DFSG-iness through NEW then ? I don't really see the difference. I would be uncomoftable with ftp-masters willfully

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

2008-10-22 Thread Ean Schuessler
- Aníbal Monsalve Salazar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Sun employee is the Chief Open Source Officer at Sun Microsystems, Simon Phipps. I'll be at Apachecon in two weeks and Simon Phipps is scheduled to be there. I'll ask him about the SUNRPC issue. Would someone privately mail me a

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

2008-10-22 Thread Raphael Geissert
[NO CC, please] Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:59 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: If we waited for a release to be 100% perfect, it will likely take several more years. The good news is that the amount of inline firmware in the kernel is decreasing. So, eventually, all