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

Re: DFSG: Do we really need a rewrite? or Just clarifications? (was Re: DFSG2: The patch exception)

On Sat, Dec 05, 1998 at 01:52:02AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 	The DFSG is the goal, in this model. The new DFSC are merely
>  rules that help us achieve the DFSG, and are only in place because
>  the DFSG may not be as explicit as it could be. The DFSC is our
>  interpretation and clarification of the DFSG.

Why do we need a DFSC? I've heard lots of talk about it not being overly
vague and not very explicit, but I have not heard much in the way of
specific cases where this has come into play..

And I have heard no reasons why we should not add the small notes here
and there to the DFSG if/when such cases do come up, if at some point
the changes become excessive, then yes, we should take a good hard,
long, look at splitting them off into a DFSC or the like, but at the
moment? Why?

As far as the DFSG2 becoming the DFSC, from what I've seen in it there
are attempts to change things from what they were in the DFSG, which
means we probably will need a good bit of a rewrite under the light of
it being what you propose of a DFSC..

Now, granted I have not been following the threads as closely as I could
have, however...

> 	There can thus never be a conflict, because a conflict means
>  that the new DFSC is in error. 

See above..
> 	As it stands, I like the sentiment of the DFSG, and I would
>  like us to stand by that document.

I agree with you here, but before creating a new document I'd like to
see specific cases where the DFSG has been too vague, and where simply
adding a few words to the DFSG to resolve the conflict would not be

Zephaniah E, Hull.
> 	manoj
> -- 
>  To be able to be caught up into the world of thought--that is being
>  educated. Edith Hamilton
> Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.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
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

 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: pgp02vpcDGC9j.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: