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