Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

[Dylan Thurston <dpt@math.harvard.edu>]

On 2003-09-14, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> Perhaps people who aren't native English speakers have learned the
> wrong definitions?

I think it's safe to say that even native English speakers may differ
on the definition of software, so speaking of "wrong definitions" is
probably not helpful.

However, in this case:
a) There is no sensible alternative definition that I have seen
   proposed (and no other grounds for judging non-programs within
   Debian);
b) Bruce Perens, the principle author of the DFSG, has clarified that
   it was intended to apply to everything on a Debian CD.

So I think it's clear which definition is controlling here.

There are clear ways to change the situation: start a discusion on
debian-project, followed by a GR.  I find it strange that this issue
continue to comes up on debian-legal, which is clearly not the place
to discuss changing the DFSG, or deciding which bits on the CDs the
DFSG should apply to.

Peace,
	Dylan Thurston