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

Re: Free non-software stuff and what does it mean. [was Re: General Resolution: Force AMD64 into Sarge]

On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 12:48:12AM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> Then maybe this is just a bunch of vapor. I don't think source code
> clause is even a starter for images, and other data. DFSG state explicitly,
>    The *program* must include source code, and must allow distribution
> in source code as well as compiled form.
> where the definition of *program* is,

Are you also going to argue, then, that DFSG#7 and DFSG#8 only apply to
programs?  They use the word, too.  If the DFSG really meant to distinguish
between "programs" and "non-programs", then DFSG#7 would say "rights attached
to programs", and not assume (by "the program") that the DFSG only applies to

2004-003 made it clear that the DFSG is the guidelines for everything in
Debian, and not just programs--that was a significant debate that it was
trying to finish, and I think arguing about "program" is ignoring the
outcome of that GR and continuing the old "software" argument in a new

Let's stop playing rules lawyers[1], and figure out what we *should* be doing.
If what we *should* be doing simply does not follow from the DFSG, then
the solution is to fix the DFSG, not to do the wrong thing (or to ignore
the DFSG).

I don't claim to really know what we should be doing, here, but we're
not going to figure that out by bickering about definitions.  We aren't
on a time limit; nobody is suggesting that we immediately throw out every
image that we don't have source for, and nobody--I hope!--is even considering
filing bugs.

[1] rules lawyer (n): one who brings out dict(1) to argue an interpretation
of the DFSG.  :)

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: