On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 22:43, John Goerzen wrote:
> I don't see the problem. 100% of the software Debian contains is Free.
Apparently, you have your very own private version of English you use to
read the Social Contract.
PARAGRAPH 1:
"Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software"
- not "free software and free documentation"
- not "free software and documenation"
- not "All Software Will Remain 100% Free Software"
"...entirely free software."
- not "entirely free software and free documentation"
- not "entirely free software and documentation"
PARAGRAPH 2:
"...so that free software will be widely distributed and used."
- not "free software and supporting non-software data,
documenation, etc"
PARAGRAPH 4:
"...we will provide an integrated system of high-quality, 100% free
software, with no legal restrictions that would prevent these kinds of
use."
- not "with no legal restrictions (except for the
documentation)"
> There may have been some looseness in the original language, but due to the
> frequent references to source code and executable code in the DFSG,
First off, the word "executable" is not in the Social Contract or the
DFSG. The closest is "software built from modified source code" which
occurs in DSFG 4.
Second, many (most?) pieces of documentation do have source and "built"
form. For example, LaTeX is built into PostScript, PDF, HTML, or DVI.
DocBook similarly. POD to nroff. Texinfo to PostScript. Many, many, more
forms, too.
[PS: Anyone know where the discussion of the Social Contract is?
-private?]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part