[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text



On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 09:35:11AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
[...]
> But you do find a megabyte acceptable, as long as it's split up among
> many different packages?
[...]
> Yes.  I want my novella published, so I break it up into pieces, and
> attach each piece to a different package; done.
> 
> In the case of a proportional test, I must provide that much actual
> work too (and benefit for the project), at the same time, for it to be
> possible--that's a big hassle.

Sounds like a good candidate for an exclusive exception.

I am of the opinion that not explicitly talking about inclusive and
exclusive exceptions in my proposal was an omission that should not have
been made.  You can be sure that I will address that issue in the next
version of my proposal, if it isn't rendered irrelevant by an
alternative amendment (see my discussions with Henning Makholm and
Thomas Uwe Gruetmueller).

Also see:

Message-ID: <[🔎] 20011203044436.GB30855@deadbeast.net>
Message-ID: <[🔎] 20011204175346.GA18335@deadbeast.net>

Note that there are competing amendments, both of which I'd be happy
with.  You should probably speak up in favor of the one you support
more.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      If encryption is outlawed, only
branden@debian.org                 |      outlaws will @goH7Ok=<q4fDj]Kz?.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpCNZYLaPC0h.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: