On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 08:16:57AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Can you actually provide such a restriction which is meaningful and
> desirable, or is this just handwaving?
Handwaving, of course. There has not yet been a practical argument
forwarded for abandoning the application of the DFSG to documentation in
main that doesn't amount to "because I want <foo> in main".
The *impractical* arguments all seem to be vehemently in favor of an
alternate set of guidelines for documentation which need not make any
difference at all to this mailing list, except to make the process of
license vetting more elaborate. ("Which parts are software and which
parts are documentation? Okay, run the software through the DFSG
sausage factor and run the documentation through the DFDG sausage
factory.")
The impractical arguments are further flawed because most of the people
making them don't seem to be aware of Social Contract clause #1.
--
G. Branden Robinson | Ambition: an overmastering desire
Debian GNU/Linux | to be vilified by enemies while
branden@debian.org | living and ridiculed by friends
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | when dead. -- Ambrose Bierce
Attachment:
pgpMVUEfnXFu1.pgp
Description: PGP signature