Your message dated Wed, 9 Dec 2015 21:43:46 +0100
with message-id <56689282.2000...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#792670: androidsdk-ddms: android sdk license appears
to violate debian charter
has caused the Debian Bug report #792670,
regarding androidsdk-ddms: android sdk license appears to violate debian charter
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
792670: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=792670
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: androidsdk-ddms
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
i've been alerted to the following in the android sdk terms and conditions:
3.4 You agree that you will not take any actions that may cause or
result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to
distributing, participating in the creation of, or promoting in any
way a software development kit derived from the SDK.
this is, in my mind, in clear violation of the debian charter and,
if correct, means that the entire android sdk should be pulled,
or at least moved to non-free.
thoughts?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 19:39:30 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
<l...@lkcl.net> wrote:
> hi emmanuel, dr stallman investigated and has this to point out:
>
> The Google SDK license contains this text
>
> 3.5 Use, reproduction and distribution of components of the SDK
> licensed under an open source software license are governed solely
> by the terms of that open source software license and not this
> License Agreement.
>
> Since (as far as we know) all free software is open source, this has
> the effect of withdrawing all their conditions from the SDK components
> that are free. They are not violating the GNU GPL.
>
> Of course, the rest of their SDK is unethical because it is nonfree,
> and people should not accept their conditions.
Since we all agree that the sources are DFSG free, I am going to close
this bug report now.
Markus
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
<http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers>.
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
