Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Friday 11 September 1998, at 10 h 16, the keyboard of Shaleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why are we going to wrestle with licenses and what not? If it fails to > meet our guidelines it gets stuffed in non-free. Limbo. Once the > license issue is cleared up, it can be moved. Rather than as

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Tyson Dowd
On 14-Sep-1998, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 11 September 1998, at 10 h 16, the keyboard of Shaleh > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why are we going to wrestle with licenses and what not? If it fails to > > meet our guidelines it gets stuffed in non-free. Limbo.

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Peter S Galbraith
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Raul> But note that contrib is being packaged as an official part of Debian. > > A small nit. It is being packaged on the official CD, but is > not an official part of Debian. I have the LSL Ofiicial CD and it doesn't contain contrib. I had to buy a Gold CDR t

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Sven
> Some Universities impose this sort of intellectual property control > from above. this is true, but all of the above, not speaking about this particular case, has something that make me think about all the free software stuff. what if i release a software under some kind of DFSG compliant lice

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Peter S Galbraith
Sven wrote: > what if i release a software under some kind of DFSG compliant > license. someo ne can simply come and sell the stuff. making profit from > it, but never giving some of it back to the author or the Free software > community. If it's GPL, a CD-ROM vendor can sell for 1M$ if they wi

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Santiago Vila
On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Sven wrote: > do we really need that some people make money of the free software for > it to be successful ? I think this is not the issue. The issue is that if we do not allow people to make money from it, then it is not free software. -- "fc87384466a193d616da72deeadea0fd

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Tyson Dowd
On 14-Sep-1998, Sven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some Universities impose this sort of intellectual property control > > from above. > > this is true, but all of the above, not speaking about this particular case, > has something that make me think about all the free software stuff. > > what

Re: Why only one non-free section?

1998-09-14 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 04:05:52PM +0200, Sven wrote: > what if i release a software under some kind of DFSG compliant license. > someone > can simply come and sell the stuff. making profit from it, but never giving > some of it back to the author or the Free software community. Yes, this is tru