Licensing and technical issues with a Wine package that includes the Mozilla ActiveX Control

hi,
On Di, 2005-11-29 at 09:52 +0000, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Sure, Scott does a great job. 
...
> What point is this assurance that Ubuntu is OK because
> it's Scott when it's only Scott as long as he doesn't make any
> controversial decisions? If anybody can edit the packages as they see fit
> at any time, it's really Scott + everybody else with an opinion.

so when does he finally join the MOTU crew (CCing him) (which he
announced he wanted to do pre hoary iirc) if he had gone through the
steps it takes to become a MOTU he'd have known that we can't include
binary contents in universe packages and this whole thread wouldn't even
have started. 

Hey Scott come and finally join us ;) i can't speak for all MOTUs but
i'm pretty sure everyone in the team will welcome if you do the step and
can take care of your packages *in* ubuntu and make them match our
requirements :)

please come aboard and make wine rock !

ciao
	oli
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20051129/85287139/attachment-0001.pgp