Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files
sandals@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx (Brian M. Carlson) schrieb:
> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 06:49:21PM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
>>> Bugs will be filed:
>>>
>>> 1) on packages that include GNU Free Documentation Licensed-material;
>>
>> I recommend not filing bugs on documentation until after sarge. The
>> project agreed by vote that it was not to be considered release-critical
>> for sarge, so, given that your bugs suggest some highly invasive
>> solutions, why be unnecessarily disruptive now?
>
> I disagree with this conclusion. As to the fact that the bugs suggest
> "highly invasive solutions", well, there really isn't a non-invasive
> solution, as much as I would like one.
Have I missed something? Have we heard anything definitive from the FSF
about their will to (not) change the GFDL? Or have we decided to take
their silence as talking?
I agree with you that the GFDL is non-free, but I still hope there are
different ways to resolve this than removing documentation.
>> The number of these that relate to frozen packages scares me. You are
>> likely to create a good deal of work for the release management team.
>> :-( In future, please perform such widespread audits *before* base
>> system freezes, not *during* them.
>
> Sorry, I found one package and then wondered how many other packages
> fell into the same category. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a
> lot.
Are you joking? Everybody knows that there are lots of documents under
GFDL in Debian. If this weren't the case, and there were only 5 or 10
packages, we would simply have fixed those bugs half a year ago.
If you are not joking, let me tell you that your search strategy was too
narrow. There are probably much more documents around under GFDL than
what you find when you look for documentation under the FSF's
copyright. BTW, please don't file a bug against tetex-base because of
your case too, there's yet #218105.
> Here's what I'm going to do as a compromise; please note that I am
> trying very hard to be reasonable: I will file bugs on those packages
> with incorrect or incomplete copyright files that are not frozen
> (priorities optional and extra) because these are release critical
> according to release policy. The remainder of the bugs will go onto a
> web page to be announced (so that maintainers can check if their
> packages are affected) and will be filed as soon as the release
> happens. I will ping debian-devel once more with a notice once sarge
> is released; this way, noone can claim they weren't notified of the
> mass-filing. Is this okay?
I think this is a good approach. An even better approach would be to use
your time for fixing RC bugs that do affect sarge.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: