Hello, Foreword : I'm not part of the debian-legal team. I'm just taking care of keeping the wiki clean.
I removed the "Truecrypt license" from the page because : * This license is specific to a single package. A bug might me more appropriate to track that. (IMHO). * The state of that license is currently "undecided", it doesn't make sense to put it on "DFSGLicenses", which is a reference page. * Get yourself a proper wikiname : "foo" looks like a spammer account ;) On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 17:13 +0200, Michael Reichenbach wrote: > Francesco Poli schrieb: > > On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 14:57:30 +0200 Michael Reichenbach wrote: > > > >> The license has been already discussed on the malinglist with opinions > >> 'DFSG-compatible' and 'not DFSG-compatible'. > >> > >> I added it to the wiki. > >> http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses?action=show#head-4aa606633f3372dc9d5087b69c2f40d06bcd3c2d > > > > I think you should link to more recent discussions: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/01/msg00122.html That was a good advice. > > > > There's no way, AFAIK, to *compel* debian-legal to provide a final / > > official verdict: unless a consensus is formed, there cannot be a > > conclusive statement. [..] > I do not want to compel someone to do anything. :) > > FranklinPiat removed everything from the wiki. (see changelog) Forwarded > the message also to him. > > But I think there should be at least *any* status information on this page. What about keeping the status of the license in : http://bugs.debian.org/364034 > It was already added to the 'unclear' section with 'unclear' status. > What was wrong with? Now completely deleting was an action I really > can not understand. If debian-legal find it appropriate, please undo my change. Sorry for any inconvenience. Franklin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
