On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 01:06:28AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Anthony Towns <[email protected]> writes: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 12:02:23AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > > > I ask you to contribute to Debian's progress, and not to impede it. > > > There simply HAS BEEN NO PROBLEM before. The GFDL is new, but the > > > principles involved are NOT; they are WELL-TRAVELED GROUND, and it is > > Sorry, I don't think this is the case. While the FSF may have established > > that they're willing to ignore certain crucial freedoms for data and > > documentation, Debian hasn't done anything similar. > Except that Debian has, in fact, included the Emacs manual since its > very inception, right?
Debian has also included KDE in contrib in the past, in spite of the GPL/non-GPL conflict, included unlicensed/non-free stuff in the upstream xfree86 tarball, included a number of packages without any licensing information, and included a number of non-free packages in main. Especially for packages which've been around a long time, there's a not completely trivial possibility that they've been allowed in main due to oversight, or an inadequate understanding of the issues. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. "Security here. Yes, maam. Yes. Groucho glasses. Yes, we're on it. C'mon, guys. Somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who can't deal with deconstructionist humor. Code Blue." -- Mike Hoye, see http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt
