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

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
From: Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 00:09:52 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 87acd0ruwv.fsf@marant.org>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1139525326.844.14.camel@arrakis.localnet> (Josselin Mouette's message of "Thu, 09 Feb 2006 23:48:46 +0100")
References: <[🔎] 20060208082136.GA18038@hoiho.nz.lemon-computing.com> <[🔎] d0461dbe0602080850n1c7b4b4eo99f8bde5216f76d9@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20060209030532.GB28269@hoiho.nz.lemon-computing.com> <[🔎] 87d5hxyyki.fsf@becket.becket.net> <[🔎] 20060209040539.GA14545@localhost.localdomain> <[🔎] 877j85yvpc.fsf@becket.becket.net> <[🔎] 20060209085909.GA6144@wonderland.linux.it> <[🔎] 1139488555.13770.1.camel@silicium.ccc.cea.fr> <[🔎] 20060209141242.GC32659@khazad-dum.debian.net> <[🔎] 1139520733.844.5.camel@arrakis.localnet> <[🔎] 20060209221924.GD18537@wonderland.linux.it> <[🔎] 87wtg49n7o.fsf@becket.becket.net> <[🔎] 87irrorvsw.fsf@marant.org> <[🔎] 1139525326.844.14.camel@arrakis.localnet>

Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:

>> Consistency?
>
> There is nothing like consistency in someone asserting that "Debian Will
> Remain 100% Free Software" means "98% free software and 2% non-free
> other things".

Prior to GFDL, GNU Manuals used to have the same kinds of restrictions
like invariant sections but noone has ever battled for moving them
to non-free.  Then came GFDL and people suddenly decided to change
the "de facto" rules.  This is the kind of consistency I'm talking
about (whether invariant sections should be allowed or not). 

-- 
Jérôme Marant

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>

References:
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Nick Phillips <nwp@nz.lemon-computing.com>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Nick Phillips <nwp@nz.lemon-computing.com>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Jérôme Marant <jmarant@free.fr>
- Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
  - From: Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?
Next by Date: Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?
Previous by thread: Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
Next by thread: Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread