Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 07:56:21PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 04:52:52PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > standard does not change the standard), the key difference is that we
> > can choose not to distribute the RFCs. Technically we /can/ choose not
> > to distribute copyright notices and licenses, but as a pragmatic
> > concession to copyright law, we opt for a non-empty distro instead. ;)
>
> Can I take this, then, as an admission that we willfully distribute non-free
> software in main, and intend to continue doing so, because we perceive a
> lack of alternatives? (In the form of, for instance, public domain
> software)
I should have put "software" in quotes, because I ask the question using the
definition of those that would define software as any bits of data that we
distribute, and thus place all bits of data we distribute, including RFCs
and the GPL, under the auspices of the GPL. I do not ascribe to that view,
but I'm trying to push it to its logical conclusion.
Reply to: