[sugar] Sugar on Edubuntu

[David Farning]

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:18 PM, David Van Assche <dvanassche at gmail.com>wrote:

> The problem here is that edubuntu and its packages are in Ubuntu Main,
> and for sugar to be in there, there must be no non-free software in
> it, and squeak is not totally free. Apple fonts not being modifiable,
> iirc. Its pretty much the same policy as debian. Scratch was recently
> rejected from MOTU for the similar reasons.
>
> David Van Assche
>
Is the issue where squeak was originally licensed under a non-free Apple
license[1] and the squeak foundations can't locate all of the original
contributors[2] to convert it to an mit license?

1. http://www.squeak.org/SqueakLicense/
2. http://netjam.org/squeak/contributors/missingSignatories

david

>
> On 11/6/08, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> >
> >  On 05.11.2008, at 13:55, David Farning wrote:
> >
> >  > .One sticking point was the availability of squeak on Ubuntu.  If I
> >
> > > remember this issue was beaten to death before I got involved with SL.
> >
> >
> > I only remember discussion of getting it into Debian, not Ubuntu.
> >  Basically, even though the license issues are finally resolved, they
> >  did not want to have it in because they do not agree with its current
> >  development model:
> >
> >  http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-June/015479.html
> >
> >  - Bert -
> >
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Sugar mailing list
> >  Sugar at lists.laptop.org
> >  http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar mailing list
> Sugar at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/attachments/20081106/c914006d/attachment-0001.htm