Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 04:36:33PM +0000, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Romain Beauxis <email@example.com> writes:
> > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and
> > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce,
> > distribute and *modify*, I completely fails to see the motivations
> > for such a decision.
> Let me quote the GR text:
> "In practice, then, documentation simply isn't different enough to
> warrant different standards: we still wish to provide source code in
> the same manner as for programs, we still wish to be able to modify
> and reuse documentation in other documentation and programs as
> conveniently as possible, and we wish to be able to provide our users
> with exactly the documentation they want, without extraneous
> materials. "
> As we don't accept program object code without source, we are not
> accepting document binaries without source, either. For the motivation
> behind the GR, read the various lists for that time, this was
> discussed extensively back then.
The requirement for source code is spelled out in DFSG#2, which explicitly
uses the word "program". Applying this element of the DFSG to non-program
works is a significant change that has *never* been ratified by the project.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/