On Tue, 04 Mar 2008, Russ Allbery wrote: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I did a check today, and there are over 230 binary packages in the > > archive with the Apache License. (I believe essentially all of them are > > Apache 2.0, although the simple grep I did made that a bit harder to > > check.) > > > > I think that reaches the threshold for making it worthwhile to include > > the license in base-files, particularly given that it's been requested > > several times, although we don't really have a formal policy on how many > > packages are enough packages. > > > > Cc'ing Santiago Vila just FYI; I know you've delegated the decision to > > the Policy group. > > I have gotten no further feedback on this proposal. I would like to > resolve this bug for the next Policy release one way or the other. Could > others reading the Policy list please express an opinion on whether we > should add the Apache 2.0 license to the list of common-licenses?
Seems sensible to me. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
