[Foo2zjs-maintainer] Bug#449497: Bug#449497: TC proposal for dispute

[Luca Capello]

Hi there!

I put back d-release to the cc: list, since we previously asked for
their help on this matter.

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:01:31 +0100, Steffen Joeris wrote:
> I am upset that you again raised the severity without consulting
> anyone.

Which, sadly, went against my specific request to not play the
severity-change game anymore [1].

> The package as it stands is DFSG free and the getweb script is there
> for the convenience of the users as well as the documentation.  Your
> arguments haven't changed my opinion.

FWIW, I completely agree with Steffen here.

> However, it doesn't look like we are finding an agreement on this
> issue. I have pinged the release team on IRC for a statement, but
> maybe this issue deserves some attention from another body of debian.
> Therefore, I suggest we write up a paragraph for the TC following
> their guidelines[0].

Since the TC seems to be the only possible solution, let's go with it.
If it's needed, I can go *again* through the sources, spotting the
copyright owners and licenses for each file Debian ships (I, in purpose,
considered only what Debian includes in its package, which is clearly
marked as $UPSTREAMVERSIONdfsg-$DEBIANVERSION).

> My proposal would be:
>
> Dear TC members
>
> Bug #449497 has reported against foo2zjs. The maintainers and the
> submitter do not seem to reach an agreement.

I would change that underlying that not only the foo2zjs maintainers,
but also other people (including a DD) agree [2].  Moreover, you can
find other DDs opinion on the thread on d-legal [3], which I looked at
quickly since, frankly speaking, things got repeated and repeated again
with no step forward.

> The problem is as follows. The submitter sees the inclusion of the
> getweb script as a violation of the DFSG. The script is provided by
> upstream to download non-free firmware from his upstream webpage.  The
> package includes documentation in README.Debian and a GUI interface
> (hannah-foo2zjs) around the getweb script for the user's
> convenience. Some printers need this non-free firmware to run, others
> don't.  More information can be found in the bugreport. Could we
> please ask you to settle this dispute?

It seems OK to me.

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca

Footnotes: 
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=449497#125
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=yes&bug=449497#39
[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/11/msg00103.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 314 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/foo2zjs-maintainer/attachments/20081027/ee9868e9/attachment.pgp