Le Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:39:08AM +0200, Clement Hermann a écrit : > > I saw that on my Sid system, some packages have the same issue : > rgrep -rl 'by-sa/2\.0' /usr/share/icons/*/scalable |xargs dlocate > --package-only > gitg > network-manager-gnome > soundconverter > thunar-volman > xfburn > xfce4-battery-plugin > xfce4-fsguard-plugin > xfce4-power-manager-data > > There may be more, since it only reports the packages I have installed. > It doesn't seem to be dual-licensing, judging from the content of the > svg files involved.
Indeed, a quick look with codesearch.debian.net shows that they are the tree that hide the forest. At this point, why not deciding that after all CC-BY-SA 2.0 is accaptable for Debian. Sorry for repeating myself, but there is not first-hand explanation of what is wrong with this license. I think that pointers to personal pages or discussions on debian-le...@lists.debian.org are not good explanations, as a lot of things that are written there do not represent Debian's point of view. Altogether, if there is no written and official justification of the problems with CC-BY-SA 2.0, that explains how this has been solved with version 3.0 and how the same problem does not affect currently accepted licenses, then the rejection of CC-BY-SA 2.0 is not justified. Tautologically, Charles -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140804223655.ga20...@falafel.plessy.net
