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

Re: For those who care about the GR

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 10:21:13 -0700, Wesley J Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> said: 

> On Saturday 21 January 2006 13:52, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> So, I am seeking arguments and guidance from the developer body
>> whether issue 1 can, and should, be decidable by a general
>> resolution, or whether the freeness of the GFDL licensed works
>> without invariant clauses is incontrovertibly non-free, as the
>> license is currently written.

> I believe this issue is a matter of interpretation, especially given
> that the DFSG is specifically and explicitly intended to be a set of
> guidelines.


> My reading of all the options of this GR so far have the effect of
> stating how the Debian project is interpreting the DFSG with respect
> to the GFDL.

        I beg to differ. The original proposal was to explain the
 stance Debian has already taken, as evidenced  by the BTS usertags
 gfdl and nonfree-doc, and the release team statement -- and how the
 license may be fixed.

        If you someone wants to change how Debian interprets the GFDL,
 it should be a separate issue -- and quite likely should be done
 before. Why is it that no one cared to override the delegates
 decision until a statement explaining the decision is being issued? 

Dying is one of the few things that can be done as easily lying
down. Woody Allen
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: