Am Montag, den 10.04.2006, 21:19 +0200 schrieb Torsten Landschoff: > > > The ftpmasters have recently rejected a package that contains another > > > schema file with identical license text, and there was no obvious > > > opposition to that decision on Debian legal [0], so the current > > > understanding seems to be that this license is not free. > > > > > [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/04/threads.html > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/04/msg00051.html ff. > > That whole discussion is silly. I am not a lawyer but I for me it looks > like you are not allowed to modify the RFC document which is fine in > this context. It's just that we use the schema documented in the RFC.
We tried to clarify this point on debian-legal without success. The same license was rejected by ftp-master so there is something wrong which we want to document. -- Noèl Köthe <noel debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
