* Daniel Baumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Eric Dorland wrote: > > If there was no final decision/consensus, isn't it a bit premature to > > start filing bugs against packages? > > Well, I first thought there is no 'license-mix' at the code-base, so > there is just a wrong/incomplete debian/copyright which can easily be > corrected. > > Now that I know that the code-base is mixed, I find it justified anyway.
I still need some more justification that the MPL is actually non-free. It's used in some rather prominent pieces of software. I can't just move it to non-free unless people are relatively certain it actually is. -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
