Re: Draft new DFSG
>>"John" == John Hasler <email@example.com> writes:
John> I wrote:
>John> The only change I would propose to the DFSG is the addition of a
>John> clause explicitly stating that Debian can pass a resolution declaring
>John> any particular license "in" or "out", regardless of its actual
>John> wording. This would effectively plug all loopholes and give Ian a
>John> chance to talk us into throwing out particular licenses that he finds
>John> repugnant even if they are technically in compliance.
You might as well throw away the DFSG. A dilution of the DFSG
with that clause would essentially mean that Debian decides, on
whimsy, what packages to accept or not to accept depending on
unspecified criteria, like whether they happen to like the color of
the eyes of the author, or not.
I wouls strongly object to this.
John> Zephaniah E, Hull writes:
>> I would strongly disagree to this, if a massive loophole is found then we
>> can patch the DFSG, but allowing us to up and decide that we don't like a
>> license which fits the DFSG is (IMHO) not acceptable..
John> We already can do this. It just isn't explicit.
No we can't already do this. We do not throw things out just
because we do not like the package. Remember the hissy fit bruce had
wrt the purity package? Despite his objection to the moral depravity
of the package, and we all said that the package was DFSG free, and
we are not into moral judgements.
John> If the only thing stopping us from refusing to accept packages
John> because we don't like the author is the absence of some words
John> from the DFSG, we have bigger problems than this.
One of the things stopping you from doing this is people like
me You throw a package like that out, and I shall package it myself
and put it in the distribution.
Having the DFSG ratify your personal preferences over an open
and deterministic standard is, quite frankly, disgusting.
We do not decide on whether to let people or package is based
on their skin color, race, creed, or whther the developers happen to
like them today.
I have travelled the length and breadth of this country, and have
talked with the best people in business administration. I can assure
you on the highest authority that data processing is a fad and won't
last out the year. Editor in charge of business books at
Prentice-Hall publishers, responding to Karl V. Karlstrom (a junior
editor who had recommended a manuscript on the new science of data
processing), c. 1957
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E