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

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

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:53:11 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote:

> To expand on that a bit more: IMHO, Debian is fundamentally about what
> its contributors want -- we're focussed on doing right by our users
> and the free software community, but ultimately, as far as Debian's
> concerned, the first and foremost representatives of both those groups
> are the users and free software community members who actually make
> Debian work.

It seems you are implying that analyzing licenses and spending time to
reply to questions sent to debian-legal is *not* a contribution to the
Debian Project.

If you really think that participating to debian-legal is not a
contribution to the Debian Project, then please have a GR to abolish
this list, so that I can stop wasting my time in dissecting issues and
providing analyses that will get ignored by decision-makers.
I used to be happy with the Debian Project having a transparent and open
license analysis process, but it seems that this is just hypocrisy: the
real decisions about which packages are acceptable for main are taken by
a few people who seem to deliberately ignore any advice from
Just like the FSF and OSI, who accept or reject licenses behind closed
doors, without any real public explanation of the rationale...

Your attitude towards debian-legal participants and towards non-DDs is
rather insulting and does not encourage me to consider the idea of
applying for the NM process.

> And when analysis of licenses tends to amount to not
> much more than "we've discussed this issue already, it's not free"
> there's not much point to the debate at all, afaics.

On the contrary, you could read the archived discussions and explain why
you think the arguments made are invalid.
I think there's not much point in repeating arguments that have already
been made in the past (and are publicly archived for future reference),
unless new data or counter-arguments are provided.

> But if no one on -legal sees what I'm trying to get at by now, I guess
> there's not much point to this debate either.

Frankly speaking, it seems to me that you are trying to persuade
debian-legal regulars to act as "yes men" who blindly follow what the
majority of the "open source" community does.
Hence, it seems you're trying to make debian-legal become pointless and

 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpGsKM3CsoNT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: