Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 12:38:43PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Brian Nelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > I'm asserting that debian-legal is not a decision-making group and has
> > no authority to dictate whether the GFDL is free or not. In fact, a
> > number of the more vocal participants on debian-legal *are not
> > developers*.
> You're saying that debian-legal is irrelevant, or at least, that's
> what I thought you were saying.
I'm saying debian-legal is irrelevant to this bug mass filing. Brian
proposed to submit these bugs on the grounds that there is a consensus
in debian-legal that the DFSG is non-free. I say that is not for
debian-legal to decide.
> It is in fact the way that Debian discusses licenses, and the
> ftp-masters and release managers give it considerable weight. It is
> not a decision making body, but it is a crucial advisory group, whose
> official job is to advise developers (including release managers and
> ftp masters) about licensing issues.
> If you don't want to be part of it, you don't have to be, but you
> don't get to insist that we need another group (called what?
> debian-legal-pure?) to do the same damn job over again.
I'm not insisting on that. In fact, in the general case, I believe
individual maintainers are the ones who should be making these
judgments. You may disagree with the maintainer, and the maintainer may
choose to weigh the advice of debian-legal in making his or her
judgment. However, I fail to see on what grounds other than the through
decision by the CTTE, the leader, or a GR, that a maintainer may be
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!