On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 19:30 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While this argument was indeed tempting, I think we also need > > to look at how free the resulting package is: Can a derivbative take > > any package in main, modify it, and further redistribute it? If yes, > > then the package can remain in main, and is free; if not, then the > > package is not free. > > Our users have permission to modify it and further redistribute it *as > long as they change the name*. That's a limitation we're willing to > accept for ourselves - why should it not be free enough for our users?
Let's say we call it mozilla-firefox (assuming we are allowed to in the first place) and downstream (making some modifications) is not allowed to call it mozilla-firefox. If we call it debian-firefox then downstream is still not allowed (under the same conditions) to call it mozilla-firefox. The difference is not that huge to me. (but naming the package just firefox seems to me like a good idea in the first place) -- -- arthur - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://people.debian.org/~adejong --
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
