On Sun, 23 May 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> A couple of remarks:
> * we don't control how mirrors mirror our archives, and we don't want to
> create a situation where mirrors need special tools and/or scripts.
According to previous posts, our top tier mirrors already run special
software to
(I'm coming in late here, but I'll make some remarks anyway. If others
made them as well just ignore me).
A couple of remarks:
* we don't control how mirrors mirror our archives, and we don't want to
create a situation where mirrors need special tools and/or scripts.
(okay, we probably could
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 03:09:43AM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> e.g. if i hear of a cool idea for a new and/or improved gadget, i
> can build one myself and use it whenever i like.
>
> In the US, you can be sued for patent infringement for doing that. I
> am not certain that it is so
e.g. if i hear of a cool idea for a new and/or improved gadget, i
can build one myself and use it whenever i like.
In the US, you can be sued for patent infringement for doing that. I
am not certain that it is so in all countries. Do you know with
certainty that some countries make an e
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 08:26:21AM -0500, Richard Kaszeta wrote:
> > Note that CTAN recently has split their archive into main and non-free
> > trees based upon licenses like we do. :)
>
> Yes, I've noticed it.
>
> What criteria do they use? The DFSG? The OSD?
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 10:53:19AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 07:51:31PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > Also, I am not sure it is useful to distinguish between
> > "use-restricted" and "patent-restricted", given that the consequences
> > would be the same.
>
> the re
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 07:51:31PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> Also, I am not sure it is useful to distinguish between
> "use-restricted" and "patent-restricted", given that the consequences
> would be the same.
the reason i suggested having a "patent-restriced" category is that
patents don'
As a practical matter, I don't think any countries restrict
importation of software that might be in Debian, unless they also
restrict its use. The only such circumstances I can think of have
to do with pornography; in the UK, for example, customs will seize
things that are on sale openly in Londo
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 08:26:21AM -0500, Richard Kaszeta wrote:
> Note that CTAN recently has split their archive into main and non-free
> trees based upon licenses like we do. :)
Yes, I've noticed it.
What criteria do they use? The DFSG? The OSD? A YAFSG (yet another
free software guideline)
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho writes ("Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution"):
>On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
>> Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be
>> to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters
On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be
> to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters, where
> you can upload to any of them, and the propagate packages amongst
> themselves.
The Comp
Debian is about freedom, specifically freedom of software. Being seen as
examplary citizens can only help our cause. We have a sterling reputation
for high standards.
I agree with you on using the two letter iso country codes. However, I
don't see a need for the extra fields Use-Restricted and
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 12:40:44AM -0700, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> Package: ssh
> Export-Restricted: United States
> Import-Restricted: Russia, France
i haven't had time to read or think about your entire proposal yet, but
my initial reaction to this is that using country names is wrong, it
shoul
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
> Well, we've established that no site in the US will carry the crypto stuff.
> So what if I'm in the US and want to get non-US stuff? Since non-us has
> disappeared into the distribution, I can't add a line to apt pointing to
> non-us. So what am I supposed t
Jonathan Walther wrote:
> How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented
> stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme
> proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so
> fine-grained that it disappears into the res
On 18 May 1999, Philip Hands wrote:
> Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be
> to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters, where
> you can upload to any of them, and the propagate packages amongst
> themselves.
Perhaps I didn't explain it clear
Jonathan Walther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented
> stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme
> proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so
> fine-grained that it d
Package: ssh
Export-Restricted: United States
Import-Restricted: Russia, France
ssh is a bad example, since it is non-free software everywhere in the
world. It is restricted by its developers. Version 2 is even more
restricted than version 1.
However, the general idea seems like a r
How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented
stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme
proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so
fine-grained that it disappears into the rest of the distribution. Or am I
Jonathan Walther wrote:
> I would think that if a mirror couldn't export a peice of software, it just
> wouldn't host it. The logistics of figuring out which country every IP is
> in are... daunting, to say the least.
Well then your proposal doesn't do away with the non-us division. Every
county
On Mon, 17 May 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
> Well what do you do about a mirror in the US that can import software but
> cannot export it? You either have to somehow validate all downloads of that
> software from the mirror are from people in the US, or you leave the mirror
> open to downloads from ev
Jonathan Walther wrote:
> Thus, server foo in France will not download the ssh package, but if the
> maintainer of ssh always uploads to the Incoming on a canada.debian.org, all
> mirrors that are allowed to will hit every server in the master.list that
> might have the package until it finds the o
Hi,
>>"Jonathan" == Jonathan Walther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jonathan> Changes to a packages control file:
Jonathan> -- Two new fields are added
Jonathan> to the control file, Import-Restricted and
Jonathan> Export-Restricted. These fields take a comma deli
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jonathan Walther wrote:
> > Mirroring Software:
> > ---
> > Im not sure what software is currently used for synchronizing mirrors,
> > however, it will need to take the above policies into account. Hopefully
> > our additions to the p
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 12:41:04AM -0700, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> For example,
>
> Package: ssh
> Export-Restricted: United States
> Import-Restricted: Russia, France
Can I suggest that we use ISO country codes instead?
> The user can do a `touch /etc/LEGAL` to make apt respect Import-Restricte
Jonathan Walther wrote:
> Mirroring Software:
> ---
> Im not sure what software is currently used for synchronizing mirrors,
> however, it will need to take the above policies into account. Hopefully
> our additions to the policy will make it so much easier to "stay legal" and
> av
We are here to make software free. We can make it free, or we can drive
thorns into our flesh trying to change the minds of uncaring governments.
Our current situation with the non-US section of our distribution is akin to
a form of fruitless martyrdom. Its painful to us, but doesn't really aff
27 matches
Mail list logo
