Re: {debian-legal} Re: Final Draft: Interpretive Guideline regarding DFSG clause 3
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> It would be helpful if you didn't repeatedly skip over the points people
> think are substantive, even when they're specifically brought to your
> attention.
I'm desperately trying to punt the whole meta discussion and the whole
meta meta discussion, to focus on the issues.
This is now the second time that I've said "I'm not perfect and
sometimes I make mistakes; when I do, the following will help me fix
them", and which you've replied as if I've declared some kind of
intention to wilfully commit the mistakes out of bad motives.
> Should I take your continual Cc'ing me and the way you blame it on your
> MUA as a subtle argument to why Debian shouldn't distribute emacs, btw?
No, just an argument about why there is such a thing about mail
standards. Oh, and the common courtesy that when you invent a new
convention, you be a little less ornery about ordering people to obey
it without lifting a finger to actually implement your pet standard.
Thomas
Reply to: