Re: [summary] Interpretive Guideline regarding DFSG clause 3
Oohara Yuuma <oohara@libra.interq.or.jp> writes:
> * Everyone on this thread agreed that works licensed under GNU FDL
> with no Invariant Sections are completely DFSG free.
It's possible that some people might similarly object to Front Cover
Texts or Back Cover Texts; it hasn't been discussed. But if you steer
clear of all such, everyone is agreed.
> * Everyone on this thread agreed that copyright notices may be invariant.
Yes.
> * Almost everyone on this thread wanted to have the emacs manual and
> the gdb manual (both have invariant texts) in main.
Ideally, yes, but not necessarily in their current form.
> * Several guidelines on invariant texts were proposed, including
> a proportional limit, a fixed limit, the zero-byte limit (that is,
> no invariant text is allowed for packages in main) and a flexible
> "judge with your common sense" limit.
Yes.
> * What the DFSG 1 ("Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software") exactly
> means is also discussed. Some interpretations are:
> 1) "Software" which is not "Free" is not part of Debian
> 2) that which is not "Software" is not part of Debian
Yes, but that's a side issue, and not really so relevant.
> * No guideline or interpretation proposed in this thread achieved
> enough consensus.
So far, but it isn't over yet.
> * This thread was mentioned in the Debian Weekly News (December 5th, 2001).
Yeah, it was mentioned.
Reply to: