Re: GFDL GR, vote please!
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 06:59:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 12:22:12AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > In spite of the Project Secretary's determination that this ballot
> > option requires a 3:1 supermajority because it modifies the DFSG,
> > given that I can't reconcile these claims that the GFDL always
> > complies with the DFSG with any (IMHO) reasonable reading of the
> > DFSG themselves, I am left without a suitable consistent
> > interpretation that I can apply in the exercise of my own duties.
> The interpretation being proposed seems to be "the DFSG allows certain
> restrictions on modifications, including the GPL's interactivity
> notification stuff and the GFDL's unmodifiable sections, with others
> potentially to be determined later". That seems reasonably easy to apply:
> deal with the existing ones as is, and assume there'll be another vote
> in future should any more come up.
The interpretation that I hold is the following:
The license must give us permissions to modify the work in
order to adapt it to various needs or to improve it, with no
substantive limits on the nature of these changes, but there
can be superficial requirements on how they are packaged.
However this interpretation is not part of my proposal. My proposal
invalidates some possible interpretations of DFSG but it doesn't state
which interpretation is the correct one.