Re: better licence for fosdem, debconf, .., videos...

[MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop>]

Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it>
> On the other hand, "kernel-image-2.6.8-2-386.deb by the Debian kernel
> team, based on the Linux kernel by Linus Torvalds and others" seems to
> be accurate credit, doesn't it?

It's an arguably accurate description, but strikes me as an arguably
misleading credit.

> [...]
> > I agree with that advice. Some licensors have drunk CC deeply and will
> > not move, so I suggest that CC-sco is a possible compromise route
> > until a fixed CC 3.x is finally published.
> 
> Please do not tell me that we must compromise our principles while
> waiting for things to get magically fixed.

Depends what principle. I do not suggest compromising on the DFSG,
but I do suggest compromising over exactly which licence to use to
as the basis for meeting the DFSG.

> I'm already deeply disappointed by the Debian project for taking such
> decision with GR-2006-001...  :-(((

I think it remains to be seen which decision the project took. The
position statement issued was vague at best, contradictory at worst,
and has caused ripples which I think will provoke another vote. Any
fools who ranked Further Discussion insincerely low and produced a bad
compromise will get what they least wanted: further discussion and more
voting as some DDs to try to still this chaos produced by imposing order.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/fdl#rankfdhigh

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct