Hi,
On Sunday 04 May 2008 19:12, Bastian Blank wrote:
>>> This was interpreted by at least one person that the license needs to
>>> pushed in the same directory on the mirror than the package.
>> And because there is one person interpreting this differently than the
>> licencing party itself, Debian shall not do what the licencing party and
>> the users would like to see?
> Who wants to define that someone is not allowed to define a binary dump
> as source and publish it under the GPL and we are therefor not allowed
> to distribute such things?
Even after reading this three times and having my second coffee I fail to
understand what this paragraph has to do with the ipw2x00 firmware. It's not
GPLed.
Maybe I need a third coffee though.
>> The question where this discussion is documented is still open.
> Somewhere in the IRC logs.
> Update: Just found it, was between aba and me, in #debian.de,
25.5.2006.
So there is no public log. (And it was probably also in the wrong language :)
>> And the
>> question whether you as the maintainers agree with that one person or if
>> you going to change this...
> If the ftp-team acks it, I have no problem with that.
Cool.
So let's get their confirmation.
regards,
Holger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG
v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBIHuGvUHLQNqxYNSARAryFAKCRWP+sv41kGGZS60FBlPzWC+8o2wCeIFuI
oJl5Rwk/hWUIeFSILbKJIno=
=7RVS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
