The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: contrib/non-free policy

On Sun, 27 Jul 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:

[snip]
> Look; contrib and non-free are really easy to understand if you are
> willing. Package that have distribution restrictions go into non-free,
> plain and simple. If the copyright/license restricts how the software can
> be distributed, then it goes into non-free. The last time I checked, Pine
> was there because its copyright prohibits distribution with proprietary
> software. This means that I can put it on my CDs because I don't include
> any proprietary software on my CDs. It still should/must go into the
> non-free section for this restriction. Each distributor must decide if the
> license fits their particular case. This is the message of non-free.

Correct.

> Packages go into contrib, if they depend on non-free packages, or other
> contrib packages, or if they fail to provide other important needs, like
> "no source", etc... So, it doesn't belong in the free section of the
> distribution, but it is for reasons other than distribution restrictions.
> As a result, I, as a CD manufacturer, don't have to worry when I include
> contrib (for those users who need it) that I might be violating some
> distribution restriction, as I must with non-free. 

This was correct until now. However, the release of the DFSG has forced us
to change this policy: we are telling people now what we consider as
`free' software, that is, every piece of software who's license applies to
the DFSG. 

According to the DFSG's definition of `free', the availability of the
source code is also necessary. Thus, packages without source are
automatically considered `non-free'.

That's why I proposed to merge `contrib' and `non-free' at first hand, but
then, a few guys here objected since this will put DFSG compliant packages
who fail other rules into `non-free'.

So the new policy I suggested is this: Every contrib package must apply to
the DFSG. Otherwise it goes to non-free. (Of course, this is much more
complicated in real life, for example, there is also the `non-us'
section.)


Hope this clarifies things a bit,


Cheers,

Chris

--                  Christian Schwarz
                     schwarz@monet.m.isar.de, schwarz@schwarz-online.com,
Debian is looking     schwarz@debian.org, schwarz@mathematik.tu-muenchen.de
for a logo! Have a
look at our drafts     PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7  34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
at    http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/debian-logo/


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .