I thought that I understood that the package itself was not FREE not that the software 
to make the package was not FREE?
E.g., the j2sdk is NOT FREE but the software that creates the package IS FREE.
Therefore, one could include the script in java-common and ALL parts of the 
java-common are FREE.

J. R.


On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:17:40PM -0500, Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
> W li?cie z pon, 27-10-2003, godz. 11:03, Stefan Gybas pisze: 
> > Takashi Okamoto wrote:
> > 
> > > J2SDK1.3 is used for server purpose by a lot of user. I'll sponsor
> > > your pacakge after supporting Sun's j2sdk1.3.
> > 
> > What do you think of including it into java-common (together with other 
> > useful Java-related scripts)?
> 
> If I understood correctly - the only actual use for it is to install
> non-free JVMs. As such it raises exaclty the same doubts as keeping
> installers for non-free stuff in contrib (which AFAIR are being moved
> to non-free).
> 
> So I don't think we want neither contrib nor non-free stuff in
> java-common.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>                                       Grzegorz B. Prokopski
> 
> -- 
> Grzegorz B. Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Debian GNU/Linux      http://www.debian.org
> SableVM - LGPLed JVM  http://www.sablevm.org
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

-- 
J.R. Westmoreland  (W7JR)
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to