On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:03:47AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Sven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My feeling is that it is DFSG non free, or at least that we > > interpret the DFSG as such, it even seemed strange to me this bit > > about aggregation, which seem meaningless if you interpret it so, > > and i ask myself why it was put there, and for what useage. > > Ah, such questions are in the bowels of history. Probably it's best > to chalk it up to a mistaken conception of what freeness needs to > include, and one that we can harmlessly fix.
Actually, I think it is meant to strengthen the clause, not weaken it. Some packages come with licenses that restrict what other software it can be bundled with. For example, a license might specify that if a package is distributed on CD, then all the other software on that CD must be free. DFSG#1 forbids such a restriction. Richard Braakman
