On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:57:17PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
> * Robert Millan [Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:34:23 +0100]:
>
> > Well, that's not the problem. If the application needs unrar to extract rar
> > archives, then suggesting unrar is ok [1]. It's the fact that the
> > application
> > supports creating rar archives that I believe violates the DFSG.
>
> > Does this explanation satisfy you? If it does, I'd like to rise the
> > severity
> > back to serious (I don't think it's an issue for the release, being only 4
> > bugs).
>
> > OTOH, if you think my interpretation of DFSG is inadequate, I could try to
> > expose it better, and we could also move this to -legal (perhaps I should
> > have
> > started there in first place).
>
> Oh dear. Are you going to suggest that we move OpenOffice.org out of
> main 'cause it can be used to create Microsoft Word files?
No. Any of the files created by OOo can be opened with free software (notably,
with OOo itself), so they're not a "trap".
A valid analogy would be like:
- In the future, we have a package of MS-Office in non-free (MS allowed us to
re-distribute it, etc)
- Users can create some new "trap format" with it (not unlikely, e.g. [1])
- Such format can't be opened with free software. Thus:
- We'd be doing a bad service to most of our users, who use OOo/etc
- We'd be harming the free software community as a whole.
(both of these are infractions of DFSG #4 IMHO)
[1] "There are also reports that Microsoft is planning to use patented
extensions to XML as the basis for a future Word format; anyone who
implements free software to read those files could be sued for patent
infringement by Microsoft."
from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
