On 12/14/2009 03:59 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I think I already gave my blessing, but I gladly give it again.
ah, ok. i was hoping for a signed message to be sure, as i wrote in #77, but i guess i'll take this as a confirmation anyway. > I think this is simplifying things too much. Nowadays, the IETF is a > bunch of people with very different backgrounds. Some of them are > dead against free software. Others threaten to veto anything that > cannot be implemented as free software. Regarding copyrights nowadays > held by the IETF Trust, it seems that the restrictionists have won. bummer :( > I think non-free is okay if you include the TLP PDF and a reference to > it in debian/copyright. do you mean http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Copyright-FAQ.pdf ? or http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Trust-License-Policy.pdf ? Do you think that actually including the pdf in the diff.gz is required, or i can just refer to it and cite it in debian/copyright? if you think it needs to be included, given the hassle of including non-text data in a diff.gz, would it be acceptable to translate it into plain text before including it? > The bug report has reordered my messages; #57 > is the correction to #62, which incorrectly states that non-free is > not an option. right, i understood that. i think there was an SMTP delay, as i received my copies of those messages out of order myself. Thanks, --dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
