On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:07:23AM +, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:39:03AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > and in particular when they can be
> > contrary to DFSG 6. (No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor) and
> > 7. (Distribution of License):
> >
> > 7. Distri
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:39:03AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 03:41:54PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:08:18AM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > > What's next? prohibiting 'tip of the day' kind of dialogs? First run
> > > wizards?
> > > Or war
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 03:41:54PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:08:18AM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > What's next? prohibiting 'tip of the day' kind of dialogs? First run
> > wizards?
> > Or warnings that this is a dangerous/experimental/developer/debugging tool
> >
Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:27:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I do think this is iffy from a DFSG #7 perspective, since it's forcing the
>> user to agree to the additional license, but I'm not sure we've ever
>> discussed that in general.
>
> That thought crossed my mind
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:27:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
> > To me, this feels like a specific instance of the general problem of
> > excessive maintainer script prompting.
>
> Oh, I see why you didn't class it that way: this isn't something done by
> the maintainer
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:17:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > I don't intend this as a slippery slope; I very specifically want to
> > cover the types of annoyances mentioned in the above paragraph, which
> > almost no software in Debian actually includes. See the tran
Russ Allbery writes:
> To me, this feels like a specific instance of the general problem of
> excessive maintainer script prompting.
Oh, I see why you didn't class it that way: this isn't something done by
the maintainer scripts, but rather something done by the package itself.
Sorry, I had some
Josh Triplett writes:
> I don't intend this as a slippery slope; I very specifically want to
> cover the types of annoyances mentioned in the above paragraph, which
> almost no software in Debian actually includes. See the transmission
> bug I linked to in the original bug submission.
> If you
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:08:18AM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On Sunday 14 October 2012 23:50:21 Josh Triplett wrote:
> > =
> > Software in Debian should not prompt users to explicitly agree to
> > licenses, disclaimers, or terms of service in order to run that
> > software. This includes pr
On Sunday 14 October 2012 23:50:21 Josh Triplett wrote:
> =
> Software in Debian should not prompt users to explicitly agree to
> licenses, disclaimers, or terms of service in order to run that
> software. This includes prompts to agree to Free Sofware licenses
> (since such licenses do not re
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 02:50:21PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> =
> Software in Debian should not prompt users to explicitly agree to
> licenses, disclaimers, or terms of service in order to run that
> software. This includes prompts to agree to Free Sofware licenses
> (since such licenses do
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
Inspired by bug 689095, I'd like to suggest something like the following
as an addition to Debian Policy:
=
Software in Debian should not prompt users to explicitly agree to
licenses, disclaimers, or terms of service in order to run that
software. Th
12 matches
Mail list logo
