Re: Intent to mass-file bugs: FDL/incorrect copyright files
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 11:13:16AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> writes:
>
> > OK, then the ftp-masters have already decided that the GFDL is
> > DFSG-compliant since they've always accepted packages containing
> > GFDL stuff, and this discussion is completely pointless.
>
> Brian, you're deliberately missing the point. The FTP masters used to
> take the position that we should have a weaker standard for
> documentation. We past a GR to prohibit this, and a second GR to make
> the prohibition effective only after sarge is released, and I have no
> reason to think that the FTP masters will ignore them.
1. It was an "editorial change" and was not supposed to change the
overall meaning of the SC.
2. I didn't see ftp-master immediately start rejecting packages
containing GFDL docs during the time when the new SC was in effect.
How could the ftp-masters even have the delegated power to decide all
licensing issues in Debian?
--
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!
Reply to: