On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:41:34 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> a) legal to distribute
> Where, and to who? You can't distribute something without being
> somewhere and distributing it to someone.
>> b) meets the dfsg
>> c) scratches an itch you feel, and something you are willing to
>> sign
>> up to maintain and keep bug free.
> Where do we specify these requirements for a package to be in
> Debian?
Umm, does everything need to come on a piece of paper
properly daubed with penguin pee?
> The Social Contract says Debian will not include software
> that has a set of legal restrictions on it and the DFSG says the
> license can't restrict distribution but neither seems to talk about
> the legality of distribution beyond licenses
And that is indeed the limit of restrictions on packages.
> When you're talking about 'controlled' things (cryptography,
> pornography, probably other stuff) there's more to it than just the
> license, at least in some places.
I think it is kinda assumed that we are not scofflaws,
breaking the laws of te land in which master and non-us live. Until
now, I had not imagined that such things had to be pointed out to
people.
> Additionally, personally I wouldn't be adverse to there being some
> additional requirements such that we remain focused on providing a
> good operating system as opposted to a general data distribution
> system for anything people want to distribute.
Yup. But first we must come up with proper definition of
RightThink.
manoj
--
signal(i, SIG_DFL); /* crunch, crunch, crunch */ --Larry Wall in
doarg.c from the perl source code
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
