Re: xmotd

2002-04-11 Thread Branden Robinson
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:49:01AM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote: > Is this sufficient? Shouldn't the whole package be moved to non-free? Not if you remove the non-free source files form the .orig.tar.gz and repack it. > And if it was in non-free, would it be OK to build it with HTML support? Prob

xmotd

2002-04-11 Thread Marcin Owsiany
Hi! xmotd package currently is in main. This is mostly OK, since it seems to be GPL-ed. (The top source directory contains file "GNU" which contains GPLv2). However the source contains a HTML rendering widget source code, which seems to be very non-free. For example: * The UI grants you (hereaf

Re: FDL 1.2 draft comment summary

2002-04-11 Thread J.B. Nicholson-Owens
On 01 Apr 2002 23:18:58 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Let's give it a week to see if you get a response from your letter. It's been a little over a week now. Did I miss the comment summary? I didn't notice any on debian-legal. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subjec