Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:44:59 +0000, Brian M Carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx> said:
> Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo <jsogo@debian.org> writes:
>> 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.
> Have you heard of the Lisp HTML program? Which is it, documentation
> or software?
Both.
manoj
--
Alcohol, hashish, prussic acid, strychnine are weak dilutions. The
surest poison is time. -- Emerson, "Society and Solitude"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: