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

Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 11:10:19AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> >> I do *not* agree that the CDDL meets the DFSG, especially when a choice
> >> of venue is in place.
> > That a poster to debian-legal doesn't think a license meets the DFSG
> > isn't particularly useful information, and is even less so when that
> > poster isn't a DD, a maintainer or someone in the n-m queue.
> A blatant appeal to authority in place of facts or analysis isn't
> particularly useful information, and is even less so when arguments
> for the contrary position have been made but not answered.

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 10:13:56AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> It's not like there aren't DDs who feel that it isn't DFSG free; Steve
> Langasek and myself have consistently argued against it, and I doubt
> we're the only two.
> That said, can the ftpmaster who approved the inclusion of star in
> main speak up and give their rationale?

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 08:30:56PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Count me in. I don't feel comfortable with choose-of-venue at all.

This attitude is exactly why there's a disconnect between regular posters
and subscribers to debian-legal and other members of the project.
How you feel about a license isn't any more important than the other
people's feelings that happen to be opposite to you. The above isn't
analysis, it's grandstanding.

And if you really want to have licenses determined by how people "feel"
rather than analysing the effects of the license in real world situations
as compared to what's actually written in the DFSG, I expect you'll find
we just end up with more GRs like the the GFDL GR that doesn't match
commonly held opinions on debian-legal at all.

If you're a non-DD, non-maintainer, or whatever, and you have new insight
to add to license/DFSG analysis, that's great! That's exactly what the
list is for.

If you just want to post about your opinion on whether we should consider
something DFSG-free or not, do it in a way that respects the fact that
there are plenty of other contributors to Debian who might happen to
hold opinions different to yours. And also realise that the only place
your opinion is actually going to have some effect is in packages you
maintain, or if we hold a poll or a vote, and posting to -legal isn't
participating in either of those.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: