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

Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract

Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr> writes:

>> Debian was mostly unaware of the existence of these invariant
>> sections, and the problem had not been greatly discussed.
> Do you mean people never read licenses before?

I do not know of any evidence that people were aware of the invariant
section requirements on the FSF manuals.  People may have read them
and not given them much thought, or indeed, simply not even read them
carefully at all.  I don't know.  

For this reason, my words are "mostly unaware".

>> I was aware of it, but at the time I still believed that the GFDL
>> passed the DFSG.  
> Prior to GFDL inception, you did not speak up about those invariant
> section, didn't you?

No, because I thought that they (and the GFDL) passed the DFSG.  Why
would I "speak up" about a license that, at the time, I thought passed
the DFSG?

I changed my mind after I was convinced by the arguments of other
people.  You know, listening to them seriously, evaluating what they
say, and so forth, rather than just declaring them idiots, calling
them fundamentalists, and complaining about voting procedures.


Reply to: