Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 11:27:01AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > In any case, I think the GFDL is too well entrenched in Debian for the
> > ctte to be summoned. A GR is the only reasonable way to decide what to
> > do with it.
>
> I'm considering a GR on what I have for breakfast tomorrow. Except, no,
> I'm not. That would be stupid. The situation with the GFDL is fairly
> straight forward - we had a vote that altered the social contract in
> such a way that documentation unambiguously has to be DFSG free. We had
> another vote where, having had the consequences explained to them,
> people chose not to revert that decision. Now you want another GR to
> decide something that we've already decided?
I'm not saying the DFSG should not be applied to the GFDL; I'm saying
there's no clear consensus that the GFDL is non-free according to the
DFSG. Or that the DFSG should be modified to allow it. Or that it's
even feasible to remove all GFDL documentation from main.
> GRs should be something that happen very rarely. They're the only thing
> that let us change our infrastructure, and that's what they should be
> limited to. Not rehashing decisions that have already been made. Not
> trying to force people to behave in certain ways. And, depressingly, not
> to let me avoid having to make my own mind up when faced with the choice
> between toast and cereal.
Is the removal of a huge portion of documentation in Debian not a major
change to our infrastructure?
--
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!
Reply to: