Hi Chris,
Thank you for your clarification regarding the strict legal interpretation of
DFSG #5 and #6 applying solely to the license text. I understand your point.
However, I would like to look at this from a technical and quality assurance
perspective, rather than just a licensing one.
Even if the license itself is perfectly compliant, the application's code
implements a hidden, hardcoded geofenced/locale-fenced behavioral change. A
software utility designed to simulate snow ("xsnow") should not contain
undocumented conditional logic that targets a specific language group ("ru") to
inject unrelated visual elements.
This hidden functionality can be reasonably classified as an unadvertised and
unwanted behavior (protestware), which diminishes the predictability and
technical excellence that Debian stable is known for.
If this is not considered a DFSG violation, shouldn't it at least be treated as
a software bug or an undocumented behavior that needs a technical patch to
restore the application's neutral and intended functionality for all users
equally?
14 июня 2026 г. 18:58:31 GMT+03:00, Chris Hofstaedtler <[email protected]> пишет:
>* Alexander Ivanov <[email protected]> [260614 17:48]:
>> 1. DFSG #5 (No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups): The software
>> introduces distinct behavioral changes and targeted messaging aimed
>> specifically at users of a particular language/locale group.
>> 2. DFSG #6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor): The application
>> restricts or alters its intended neutral functionality based on the user's
>> environment.
>
>This is not what DFSG points 5 or 6 require. They require specific things
>about the software's license. The licenses in use do not appear to violate the
>DFSG's points 5 or 6.
>
>Please read the DFSG carefully next time.
>
>Best,
>Chris
>
