Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> > >From DFSG FAQ Draft ( http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html ):
> This document mostly represents the opinion of the "DFSG revisionists",
> so it's hardly a surprise that supports the "we decide what is non-free"
> school of tought (sic).
I'm the primary author of that document, so please excuse me when I
ask: What the fsck are you talking about?
That DFSG FAQ document is an attempt, with contributions by many, to
explain the DFSG and Debian license policies, as practiced. It was
written before the GFDL general resolution, and to the best of my
ability says nothing particularly controversial about the GFDL. It is
in fact agnostic on the issue of the freedom of the GFDL sans cover
texts etc.
If you have any particular suggestions for improvement, or have found
what you feel to be factual errors or biases that should be corrected,
I'd appreciate it if you would bring them to my attention. This might
be more productive than making sly whacky criticisms that I can't even
understand. I don't even know what a "DFSG revisionist" is supposed
to be! Are you one? Am I? Please help, I can't even tell which side
I'm on, or who the players are!
--
Barak A. Pearlmutter
Hamilton Institute & Dept Comp Sci, NUI Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland
http://www.bcl.hamilton.ie/~barak/
Reply to: