Re: Social Contract GR's effect on sarge
Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
> You know, there was this "committee" which was supposed to meet with the FSF
> about the GFDL problems, and report back in early April? What ever
> happened to them? You don't think the FSF could be *stalling*, do you?
Even if the FSF were uncooperative (which I don't know), this fact
should be documented first. Anything else is unprofessional and will
harm Debian in one way or the other.
>> At the rate we're currently going, I don't really expect to be able to
>> achieve this this year.
> Particularly replacing the documentation, which is *huge*.
Furthermore, any bitmap rendering of a vector drawing has to be
removed if the vector drawing is not available, and all Postscript
files without source code have to be removed. This audit is a
substantial task.
> Releasing sarge with a documentation shortage is probably the only
> option.
This is not an option at all.
--
Current mail filters: many dial-up/DSL/cable modem hosts, and the
following domains: atlas.cz, bigpond.com, di-ve.com, netscape.net,
postino.it, tiscali.co.uk, tiscali.cz, tiscali.it, voila.fr.
Reply to: