[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ITP: debian-backports-keyring -- GnuPG archive key of the backports.org repository


On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 19:34 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> I *used* to think that those disclaimers are implicit in most cases.
> But then, I was harshly accused of not making it clear enough that
> I am neither a lawyer, nor a Debian developer, that I'm not providing
> legal advice, and that I don't speak on behalf of the Debian Project.
> Other people were similarly attacked for the same reason.
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/10/msg00133.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00014.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00038.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00092.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00106.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00222.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00278.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00062.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00215.html
> As a consequence I began adding the disclaimers to my messages, in
> order to explicitly remind readers about the above facts.
> Now, you say that those disclaimers are a waste of time...
> I'm really puzzled.

Have you ever heard the fable concerning a father, a son and a donkey?
In a nutshell, first, nobody rides down the road on the donkey, and
instead lead him with a rope. People criticized them for doing so, e.g.
"why not let the kid ride on top of the donkey?"

So, the father told the kid to ride the donkey. Then people criticized
them again, for not letting the father ride the donkey instead. So, they
switched again. Then people criticized that too, so they wound up
carrying the donkey. Eventually, they reached a stream and fell in the
water because there was too much weight in once place on the bridge they
were crossing.

The moral of the story is that no matter what you do or say, somebody
will complain about it. So, the best path to take is the one which you
think is correct.

Judging by the point that you used to believe that the disclaimers were
implicit, it seems like going back to assuming that might be a good
idea. But, that's just my opinion, obviously.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: