Roberto Alsina <ralsina@conectiva.com.ar> writes:
> Then again, I did release software under very liberal licenses and Debian
> would still not accept it. KFTE is under the LGPL and there is no way to
> even start packaging for debian, because kdelibs is not in debian,
> although there is no licensing argument against it.

OK, can I try to straighten this out.

kdelibs was flushed from Debian at the same time as the other KDE
packages, because the copyright file declared that some file (I forget
which) was under the GPL.

It turned out that that was a simple mistake, because the file in
question was available under either the GPL or the LGPL, and so
kdelibs should not have been removed, and should be allowed in as soon
as someone uploads a new version with a fixed copyright file.

As far as I know (and I could be completely wrong, because I've not
been paying close attention) nobody has since uploaded a fixed
(i.e. with an accurate copyright file) kdelibs.  This might be because
whoever was maintaining it (Stephan Kulow IIRC) thinks it's too much
effort to upload kdelibs alone, and is happy to maintain an APTable[1]
set of packages outside Debian.

If any Debian developer has actually tried to upload kdelibs, and had
it rejected, please speak up now, with the reasons given for the
rejection, and I'll guarantee to do my best to get the situation
resolved.

If nobody has attempted to upload kdelibs, then it's not too
surprising that Debian doesn't currently include it, is it?  [2]

Similarly, has anyone actually attempted to upload KFTE?

Personally, I'm not interested enough in KDE (or Gnome, or GUIs in
general) since I use X mostly as a way of getting 9 xterms on my
screen at once, so would make a useless maintainer for any of these
packages, but if there's anything I can do to assist with other
Debian developers' efforts to upload any KDE applications with
"proper" licenses, and get them included, then please mail me and I'll
do my best to help you.

Hopefully this will act to quell the drivel about there being an
anti-KDE vendetta going on from the Debian side, and with luck start
the influx of the parts of KDE that have valid licensing terms (when
viewed through the pedantic licensing goggles we generally wear in
Debian ;-)

Cheers, Phil.

[1] APT (Debian's Advanced Package Tool) allows multiple sources of
    packages to be searched when updating one's system, so it is easy
    for people outside Debian to create an archive of packages that
    will seamlessly install into a Debian system, and the user only
    needs to add one line to one file once, and never worry about it
    again.  I think this is probably the reason that there is no KDE
    whatsoever in Debian, since maintaining a complete KDE archive
    outside Debian is going t be required until all the licenses are
    fixed, I don't think anyones worried about duplicating some of the
    effort by also uploading a few of the packages to Debian.  I could
    be wrong though, because I've not been trying to notice what's been
    going in and out of the Incoming directory.

[2] Being an anarchic, voluntary effort, Debian's actions cannot
    necessarily be judged as you might judge the actions of other
    corporate entities.

    Lack of action often simply indicates that no individual has
    decided that the action is important enough to get of their
    backside and actually do it.

    Please don't assume that some internal committee has taken a
    decision about not doing something, because there are no such
    committees in Debian, and the closest thing we have
    (debian-private) is readable by all Developers, and that includes
    some KDE developers, so they'd know if some private anti-KDE
    decision had been taken, or even suggested.

BTW I'm not subscribed to this list, so Cc: me if you want me to see
your replies.
 
>> Visit http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<