On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 03:04:51PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit David Nusinow <david_nusinow@verizon.net>
>
> > From reading the responses from Andreas, rather than people trying poorly
> > to interpret him, it's pretty apparent that they'll be giving freely
> > licensed talks a greater weight than non-free ones. They're also going to
> > make it easy to choose a free license from their interface. Furthermore, it
> > implies a very strong desire to have freely licensed materials
>
> All of that is nice and well, but it does not change the fact that a
> DSFG-free license is not *required*.
>
At the moment, this is correct.
A discussion was had on the mailing list[0] and the irc channel[1] on a
similar issue, whether we should allow non-free software for the
presentation of slides.
I updated the site to state:
"If using slides, please consider that your audience will consist of
people who use free software, and your choice of application to prepare
and display the slides should reflect this if at all possible."
I think this strikes a good balance of:
"Use free software! Use free software! Use free software! Oh, ok, if you
really can't, I suppose we'll let you get away with it. But you should
really."
> > Hopefully if you don't like the way they run the conference
> > you'll get involved in the future and help to make it even better.
>
> I am perfectly happy with the way the conference is being run. I am
> opposing those people who want the organisers to change the way it is
> being run, such that DFSG-nonfree papers will be thrown out simply
> because of the licensing.
>
Interestingly, no one has asked us to do so on the team list.
Regards,
Neil McGovern
[0] debconf6-team@lists.debconf.org
[1] #debconf-team @ Freenode
--
__
.` `. neilm@debian.org | Application Manager
: :' ! ---------------- | Secure-Testing Team member
'. `- gpg: B345BDD3 | Webapps Team member
`- Please don't cc, I'm subscribed to the list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature