Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)
> No, I do not. It's obviously not an exception (or it would have said so)
> but a way to officially state what the DFSG means when applied to this
> license, since there has been a wide disagreement in the project about
> this.
The position statement appears to state the conclusion without stating
what the DFSG mean when applied to this licence. It says nothing about
the anti-DRM or Transparent/Opaque problems directly. It just pulls a
conclusion out of the project's backside without rationale. This leaves
a huge gaping hole in the understanding of the FDL. Dumb.
Most FDL'd works I care about include unmodifiable sections and this
position statement is clear about them, at least.
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: