Glenn Maynard writes:
> gnu-standards is obviously unlikely to be relicensed, and can't be
> rewritten
Of course it could be rewritten (though a rewrite should be retitled).
Standards are ideas, not expression.
--
John Hasler
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 04:12:35PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 09:34:20PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > I think it might be a good thing if you orphan this package before you
> > ask for removal, especially as you (and we all) know that GFDL-docu is
> > allowed in the up
* Glenn Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041204 22:25]:
> 2004-004 is not "allow non-free documentation in main for Sarge; we
> don't care"; it's "allow non-free documentation in main because we don't
> have time before Sarge to deal with it all". In no way does it discourage
> maintainers with the ti
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it might be a good thing if you orphan this package before you
> ask for removal, especially as you (and we all) know that GFDL-docu is
> allowed in the upcoming release of sarge.
The rationale for that is that it's too much trouble for
maintain
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 09:34:20PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Please remove the gnu-standards package (that I maintain). Its
> > use of the GNU FDL violates Debian's DFSG, so it cannot remain in
> > the distribution.
>
> I think it might be a good thing if you orphan this package before you
* Ben Pfaff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041204 18:25]:
> Package: ftp.debian.org
> Version: 2004-12-04
>
> Please remove the gnu-standards package (that I maintain). Its
> use of the GNU FDL violates Debian's DFSG, so it cannot remain in
> the distribution.
I think it might be a good thing if you orpha
6 matches
Mail list logo
