On Thursday 06 July 2006 21:26, Erast Benson wrote: > On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 19:56 +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote: > > > > Will the package be orphande next time? > > > > > > No, depending on the outcome of the licensing issues, either the > > > current maintainers still continue to maintain the package, or it has > > > to be removed from Debian completely. > > > > IMHO we have to have a GPL'd package. > > Hopefully, this will never be a requirement. Many people just hate GPL > and gives their preferences to an existing OSI-approved alternatives.
The requirement for main is to have a DFSG-compliant package (the license either could be GPL, 3-clause BSD, Apache, MIT, Artistic, ...). That is DFSG compliance what counts here, not just OSI approval. Please read that very carefully: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/07/msg00027.html FWIW, statements like 'who hates what' are far from being serious. Counter examples exists (search for 'star+openbsd' acceptance), but noone is interested in yet another license war </over> -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
