sm-admin AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Developer Only Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86
- From: "Robert Helgesson" <rycee AT home.se>
- To: sm-admin AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:49:27 +0100
I think delaying a move to a XFree86 version with the new license may be
a good option despite the fact that we most likely are not hindered by
the new license. Waiting until the FSF have had a chance to discuss this
with the XFree86 people and the correct way to intepret the license is
known seems prudent. I vote +1 on this until the situation is more
clear.
I don't see any direct reason for moving the XFree86 spell to z-rejected
since the new license appear to be free. Anyway if we were to violate
the license by using it in the main grimoires then I would assume we
would continue violating it even if we were to add it to z-rejected. I
can see the argument for moving it there for reasons of solidarity with
other distros though. Anyway, I don't hold very strong feelings on this
so I vote -0.
On a slightly related tangent I do think that the main grimoires should
only hold free software.
Regarding the testing of alternatives I don't see a reason to haste. We
shouldn't spend to much energy on this until it's clear staying with
XFree86 is a dead end. Of course if somebody wishes to make spells for
other X servers and libraries then I have no problem with that but I
don't think we should collectively panic at this point in time. I vote
+0 on this.
--
/ Robert Helgesson |-- rycee AT home.se --\
\-- GPG Key ID: 41E95A5B --| http://www.rycee.cx/ /
-
[SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Eric Schabell, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Eric Sandall, 02/21/2004
- Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86, Jason Flatt, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Jason Flatt, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Jose Bernardo Silva, 02/21/2004
- Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86, Robert Helgesson, 02/22/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Ladislav Hagara, 02/23/2004
- Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86, Unet, 02/23/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Jose Bernardo Silva, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Eric Sandall, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Hamish Greig, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Andrew, 02/21/2004
- Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86, Hamish Greig, 02/24/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Andrew, 02/21/2004
-
Re: [SM-Admin] Re: [SM-Discuss] license of xfree86,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/21/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.