[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 20:01:24 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote:

> What I care about is having a reasonable, widely understood definition
> of free software that meshes with the rest of the free software and
> open source community, that Debian can use to work out what software
> we'll distribute in main.

Then, I think you have to start by reconciling the open source community
with the free software community: OSI and FSF already have a
non-negligibly different set of accepted licenses.

  *Red Warning*

This message is from a non-DD, non-maintainer and non-applicant.
As a consequence, everything I say has to be checked and double-checked.
Debian developers, instead, know the truth by definition and never say
anything wrong: hence, no need to check what a DD says.

Seriously, could you please stop this discrimination against non-DDs?
I think Debian users should have the right to express their opinions and
arguments on Debian lists: whatever they say should be considered for
its merits, just like it should be done for Debian developers.
It's not that users are second-class citizens or Harijans: after all the
Debian Social Contract is a promise made by Debian developers to the
Free Software Community (which, IMO, includes free software users).

 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: pgpMAhxSsXAIb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: