On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 02:49:10AM -0600, Scott Dier wrote: > Perhaps call it the DFLG, Debian Free Licensing Guidelines, where as > the License is the focus, and not the contents. That sounds eminently sensible to me. However, it will be likely quite some time before the DFSG can be amended in any way whatsoever. For details, see the Flamewar of 2000 in the debian-vote list archives. > Pehraps lots of docs in main will be affected, In the "Impact" section of my proposal I asserted my belief, with supporting facts, that this will not be the case. In case that makes you feel better? :) > but do we want to deticate space and bandwidth to non-free licensing, > or does the cabal of publishing ideas limit us to thinking of > documentation as Free? I'm sorry, I don't understand this part. -- G. Branden Robinson | We either learn from history or, Debian GNU/Linux | uh, well, something bad will branden@debian.org | happen. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Bob Church
Attachment:
pgpmC2sCZuIsg.pgp
Description: PGP signature