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

Re: All GPL'ed programs have to go to non-free

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:22:06AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 06:24:51AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > The nice thing about 3:1 majorities is, that once you've tricked 
> > something as "Editorial amendments" into it, a 25% minority is enough to 
> > block reverting it...
> Nobody was "tricked".  I believe this claim so laughable, and at the
> same time so insulting to Debian Developers ("we forgot to read what
> we voted for!  I want a do-over!"), that I don't feel inclined to argue
> it further.  Again, the SC is crystal clear; again, only a GR will
> change that.
> My belief, from experience of many discussions on these topics on these
> lists, is that a huge majority of Debian Developers agree that documentation
> must follow the DFSG, that a fringe minority who want GNU documentation in
> Debian at any and all cost are making ludicrous claims, and that nobody is
> falling for them.  I'm willing to continue arguments pertaining to the GFDL,
> but these "we didn't *really* want to require documentation to be free"
> arguments are going nowhere and are a waste of time, so I'm dropping them.

Only one month after GR2004-003, a two third majority of the Debian 
developers preferred in GR2004-004 reverting GR2004-003 over keeping the 
changes of GR2004-003.

You do believe that two thirds are a "fringe minority" and less than one 
third is "a huge majority"?

After the whole GR2004-003 mess it's hard to say what the majority of 
Debian developers really wants.

> Glenn Maynard



       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Reply to: