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

Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files

El mié, 17-11-2004 a las 19:27 +0000, Brian M. Carlson escribió:

> >   Without wishing to start/take part in a huge flamewar didn't we have
> >  a vote and agree to leave such documentation issues until after
> >  Sarge's release?
> >
> >   Here's the result I'm thinking of:
> >
> > 	http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
> No, you agreed to revert the Social Contract to its previous wording,
> IIRC.  The Social Contract as currently worded (with that vote in
> consideration) states that "Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software".
> debian-legal interprets that to mean that (and please correct me if I
> am misstating the consensus) the Debian distribution must consist
> completely of free software.  So if it is not software or it is not
> free, then it would not be qualified to be in the Debian distribution.

  And documentation is not software.

> Also, I think that even if those bugs in category 1) were ignored
> until after the release (which would not make me happy), those bugs in
> category 2) are still release-critical.  And if you are correct and
> "we"[0] did agree to such a thing, then the instant that Debian releases
> sarge will be the instant that these will be serious.  So fixing them
> sooner rather than later is better for our users and free software.

 No. You have only detected some packages having GFDL documentation.
Surgering them now will mean a lot of work, that we should concentrate
in releasing Sarge, not in other different stuff.

> [0] Please note that I am not a DD, and if I had been at the time of
> the vote, I would have voted for Proposal F.

 Whatever you had voted, what counts is what has been decided by

Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente

Reply to: