Re: Vim should be moved to non-free (See #132251)

Previously Lazarus Long wrote: > Reading /usr/share/doc/vim/copyright, it appears this package fails to > comply with point 3 of the DFSG. If so, this seems "messy" at best, > since it has been in main in previous releases, hence should probably be > discussed on this list. If you are interested

Vim should be moved to non-free (See #132251)

Reading /usr/share/doc/vim/copyright, it appears this package fails to comply with point 3 of the DFSG. If so, this seems "messy" at best, since it has been in main in previous releases, hence should probably be discussed on this list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] contains the actual bug report. (Consider

Re: Depending on non-US libs

Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does this program need to go in non-US, Yes. > and if so, is it legal for me to upload it there? If you want advice on what's legal for you, you should really talk to a lawyer. [Having said that, plenty of other US citizens are uploading crypto to t

Re: license requirements for a book to be in free section

> Indeed. Debians manifesto doesn't even has a copyright notice not to > speak > of a license, and for the DFSG you will find people who say that even > the > copyright holders must not change it. Fact is that the FSF never was > as > zealous as some people want to make it appear. I know. The r

[no subject]

unsubscribe