[Debtags-devel] New categorization proposal

[Václav Jůza]

Hi,

Dne st 16. listopadu 2005 13:03 Enrico Zini napsal(a):
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:40:39PM +0100, Václav Jůza wrote:
> > > Right now, it looks a bit overwhelming to me, but that's more because
> > > of the bewildering nature of (non-free) software licensing.
> >
> > I formerly thought about less categories (no no-*), but when I was giving
> > tags to the example packages, I decided, that there is far different,
> > when package can be distributed, but only free of charge, and when the
> > package can not be redistributable at all.
> >
> > > Do you care for asking our lawyers at debian-legal about it?
> >
> > I have not asked them yet. Actually I don't know, what to ask them
> > exactly about. Simply, what they think about it?
>
> I've tried contacting them in the past[1] and unfortunately what came
> out was lots of nitpicking but little help towards getting anything
> done.
> [1]
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/2005-June/000414.htm
>l
>
> It should be tried again (also, this time the issue is different), but
> when writing them I think it should be more of an "help us in getting
> this done" rather than a "tell us what you think".
>
>
> As of the proposed tags, they seem to be calling for more grouping.
> Let me try to rework it a bit:
>
> Facet: restricted
> Tag: restricted::bin:use
> Tag: restricted::bin:dist
> Tag: restricted::bin:change (included for simmetry, maybe meaningless)
> Tag: restricted::src:use (or study)
> Tag: restricted::src:dist
> Tag: restricted::src:change
> Tag: restricted::deps:run
> Tag: restricted::deps:build
>
> It looks a bit more elegant to me, and it seems to be better able to
> distinguish restrictions like pine (can't redistribute binary, can
> redistribute source).  It also doesn't try to describe more in detail
> what is the sort of restriction, which would probably be impossible
> giving the crazy draconian things people write in licenses sometimes.
>

Yes, it looks more elegant, I would be happy if there would be anything
for this porpose. 

In the list you wrote above, I only miss an equivalent to my no-source, for 
cases when a package does not have source at all (for example rar),
and difference between nonfree-dist (for example distribution can bo only
free of charge) and no-dist (can't distribute at all).

Vaclav
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20051117/ba20d64e/attachment.pgp