On 16 Oct 2006 13:59:26 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Niels Möller) scribbled:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > It seems this source package contains the following files from the > > IETF under non-free license terms: > > > > nettle-1.14.orig/testsuite/rfc1750.txt > > Hmm. This is kind-of funny. I use this file as test input regression > testing of the pseudorandomness generator, because I felt it was > appropriate... > > I can easily replace the file by any free text file. Any suggestions? > > For instance, I could replace it by the GNU manifesto, subject to > "Permission is granted to anyone to make or distribute verbatim copies > of this document, in any medium, provided that the copyright notice > and permission notice are preserved, and that the distributor grants > the recipient permission for further redistribution as permitted by > this notice. Modified versions may not be made.". > > Is that acceptable? I haven't been following the debian debates on the > topic very closely. As far as I'm aware, the GNU manifesto is included > in debian's emacs packages, and it would look pretty silly to remove > it. > > Anyway, in the context of Nettle, rfc1750 is not really "source code", > and it doesn't make much sense to modify or fix bugs in it. Niels, I will just remove the file from the Debian .orig tarball... For that I will need to either create a fake version of libnettle (i.e. 1.14.1) or ask you to release a new version upstream - this is the only way for me to be able to remove the file from the tarball and upload the .orig.tar.gz to the archive. Which way do you prefer? And I will save my opinion on such issues to myself or for private conversation. best regards, marek
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
