Something in the mix seems to have been messed up, as your message (below) fails to match up with the signature.. :/ Care to re-send? I'm paranoid enough that I'm not even going to bother to read a somehow altered message on this topic <G>.. Zephaniah E, Hull. (Paranoid?) On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 06:24:57PM -0800, Darren Benham wrote: > Replies to multiple messages here. > > >> Contents > >> -------- > >[...fills a screen...] > > > >Is this really necessary? =p This is part of what I mean about format. > > No, of course not. I'm using debiandoc to code this and following the examples > they provide. If Debian would prefer not to have the contents, it can be > easily removed... like by deleting one line in the sgml file. > > >I can understand why seperating things you must allow and things you > >might require is probably a good thing, but I don't like it much > >personally. I think we should perhaps not use it if we intend to keep > >the social contract and DFSG together in the same file, but it might be > >more sane if they were in seperate files and just referred to eachother. > > I think seperating things is a good idea.. that's why I havn't let this die. > I'd also like to see the DFSG seperate from the social contract. There have > been a number of times, in the beginning, that I've gone to look for the DFSG > to compare it against a license and couldn't find it... It didn't make sense, > to me, to look for the DFSG in the Social Contract. > > >> 1. Introduction > >> ---------------- > >[..] > > > >Again, I don't think this is needed if we're including this with the > >social contract as that should define the scope and set forth the goals > >and lead into the DFSG. If the DFSG will stand on its own however this > >isn't needed. > > What is needed is something.. a paragraph or more.. that explains, at a > minimum, that a license that wants to be considered DFSG-free must grand the > permissions and can only restrict those permissions in ways listed. I'm open > to suggestions on what that wording should be. OTOH, if this document *is* to > stand alone, a little bit about what and why DFSG wouldn't hurt. > > >Is "you're going straight to hell if you don't send me a postcard" a > >non-binding request? Just curious where the moral imperative becomes > >binding (even the FSF makes non-binding requests for donations :-)... > > Since going to hell wouldn't prevent you from using/distributing/modifing the > software, I'd call that non-binding :) > > >Noteworthy that you define software as software, not software and > >documentation. This is intentional I hope? => > > This is intentional. > > [re: terms section] > >I'm not sure if these things aren't obvious. This is one of those > >differences between having something clear to begin with and having to > >define everything for you. > > Some of this isn't obvious. I've had a few people ask just what we meant by > "depecated". That was the prime reason for adding this section. Deprecated > can imply many things but this (what ever ends up here) is what the DFSG means > when it uses it. Software I decided to throw in there because some tried to > apply DFSG to documentation, papers, documents, etc and it wasn't always a > clear association (just what *is* the source of a document? Because I don't > use sgml, it's not DFSG-free? Or I wrote it in in a text format and you > browsed it and saved it as html... or...???). The 'S' in DFSG stands for > software. We can always write a DFDG if we need/want to. As for licencee... I > was getting desprate to fill the section :) > > [I welcome replies to my list email cc'd to me] > > -- > ========================================================================= > * http://benham.net/index.html <>< * > * -------------------- * -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ---------------* > * Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * > * <gecko@benham.net> * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++* > * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * > * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ * > * <gecko@debian.org> * G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ * > * -------------------- * ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------* > ========================================================================= -- PGP EA5198D1-Zephaniah E, Hull <warp@whitestar.soark.net>-GPG E65A7801 Keys available at http://whitestar.soark.net/~warp/public_keys. CCs of replies from mailing lists are encouraged.
Attachment:
pgpAf685OkuSX.pgp
Description: PGP signature