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

[Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr>]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:

> md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
>> On Feb 09, Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>>> This was necessary only because the release manager believed the changes
>>> to be non-editorial. I cannot even understand an interpretation of the
>>> old wording that can lead us to accept non-free documentation into main.
>
>> This may be annoying for you, but it's a fact that there is an
>> interpretation of the old wording which has been used for years to
>> accept non-free documentation into main.
>
> How is this relevant?

Consistency?

-- 
Jérôme Marant