Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-15 Thread anatoly techtonik
Given that people are tired of discussing things they've already decided for themselves I CC this to debian-legal. On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > The Debian policy is software with source code: the DocBook source document. It is not clear why GPL notice doesn't stay in the

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-15 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
please move your discussion to private or -legal -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-15 Thread anatoly techtonik
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Christoph Egger wrote: > anatoly techtonik schrieb: >> >> Questions like "Debian Python Policy is all about GPL. Do I have to >> release my Python package under GPL?". Most people (as you clearly >> expressed) don't care, so upstream maintainers would just avoid D

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-13 Thread Ben Finney
anatoly techtonik writes: > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Ben Finney > wrote: > > Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ridiculous to put a policy > > document under GPL than any other document? > > It is in the same ridiculous for other document. It is ridiculous in > the way people want to

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Christoph Egger
anatoly techtonik schrieb: > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Adam wrote: >> This is a topic for debian-legal not debian-pyhton. Discuss it with them >> (after looking at the archive), as they are the experts. If there are >> problems (= results) that can be brought here again. > > The point is t

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread anatoly techtonik
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Adam wrote: > This is a topic for debian-legal not debian-pyhton. Discuss it with them > (after looking at the archive), as they are the experts. If there are > problems (= results) that can be brought here again. The point is to make Python Policy clear without a

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Scott Kitterman
> Hello, > > The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent > citing Debian Policy in private talks. I imagine people discussing > "those folks at Debian. Have you heard - they've changed you-know-what > to make packaging easier". =) > > Is there any license that more clearl

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Adam
> I wouldn't go so far and see documentation as software. Apart from that > I agree that it is important to clarify what one can do with this > documentation (quote, modify, redistribute, etc.) and under which rules > this has to happen. For example, when I quote a paragraph of the > documentation

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Bastian Venthur
Omer Zak schrieb: > On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 14:27 +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote: >> Ben Finney schrieb: >>> anatoly techtonik writes: >>> The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent citing Debian Policy in private talks. >>> Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ri

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Omer Zak
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 14:27 +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote: > Ben Finney schrieb: > > anatoly techtonik writes: > > > >> The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent > >> citing Debian Policy in private talks. > > > > Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ridiculous to put

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Bastian Venthur
Ben Finney schrieb: > anatoly techtonik writes: > >> The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent >> citing Debian Policy in private talks. > > Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ridiculous to put a policy document > under GPL than any other document? Quoting the sec

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread anatoly techtonik
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > >> The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent >> citing Debian Policy in private talks. > > Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ridiculous to put a policy document > under GPL than any other document? It is in the

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread Ben Finney
anatoly techtonik writes: > The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent > citing Debian Policy in private talks. Why is it ridiculous? Is it any more ridiculous to put a policy document under GPL than any other document? > I imagine people discussing "those folks at D

Re: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

2009-12-12 Thread anatoly techtonik
Hello, The policy is under GPL license which is kind of ridiculous to prevent citing Debian Policy in private talks. I imagine people discussing "those folks at Debian. Have you heard - they've changed you-know-what to make packaging easier". =) Is there any license that more clearly states reaso