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

Re: Debian's Linux kernel continues to regress on freedom

[Ron Johnson]
> If I decided that I wanted to "build a better mousetrap", the first
> thing I'd do is go read the relevant RFCs.

Right, and the second thing you'd do is start hammering out a spec for
your improved protocol.  Doing this by cutting and pasting bits from
the existing RFC just might be a lot more convenient than rewriting
your whole protocol spec from scratch.

> While I know that a source file is a "document", some of us have
> more difficulty than others believing or even *agreeing* that
> "traditional" documents should be GPL-style libre.

We're pretty much at an impasse, then, so I don't think I'll reply
after this message.  I, and many Debian folks, don't quite understand
the essential difference, between functional source code and
non-functional documents[*], that make the DFSG freedoms only important
for the one and not the other.  I mean, if I might want to freely make
derivative works of software, well, maybe I want to freely make
derivative works of spec documents too.  For many of the same reasons,
in fact.

[*] And, in fact, RFC documents are more "functional" than most other
    documents.  A few even include example source code.

Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: