Re: DFSG : Really useful?
On 27 April 2014 13:16, Solal <solal.rastier@me.com> wrote:
>>> The two documents are incompatible, and the DFSG is very laxist and do
>>> not protects completely freedom. FSDG protects freedoms : it resolves
>>> issues : proprietary software is totally banned, patents are prohibited,
>>> trademarks limited, etc.
>>>
>>> GFDL is free, because Invariant Sections are free if used in opinions
>>> (nobody want peoples modify their opinion in a text). The GFDL prohibit
>>> the use of Invariant Sections in technic texts.
>>>
>>> The only case where a software respects FSD but not DFSG is good. That
>>> can be a software which prohibit the use of proprietary software in
>>> aggregates.
>>> This is good, totally ethical, and I think a license should do that for
>>> protect uers from proprietary.
>>>
>>> The cases where a software respects DFSG but not respects FSD are bad.
>>> For example, a software which prohibit the distribution of modified
>>> versions respects DFSG if it authorize patch files.
>>> But it's unethical.
>>>
>>> In some years, the patch will maybe be incompatible with the new version.
>>> The Debian project authorize that (but encourage to do not do that, but
>>> that's not suffiscient).
>>>
>>> The Debian project authorize too certain licenses which is too vague for
>>> talk about free (the Artistic License 1.0, for example).
>>>
>>> The DFSG is really bad, too laxist and useless.
>>
>> I see that you don't like the DFSG. But as already has been said: We
>> are Debian and follow our own contract and not a contact of some other
>> project/company.
>> I think if you have problems with the DFSG you should propose changes
>> to improve it instead of saying we should drop it and follow someone
>> else.
>>
>> PS: Please don't top-post.
>>
>> Regards
>> Sven
>
> I understand you do not want use a someone else's contract, but the FSDG
> are an anagream of DFSG, so that's the same... No, I joke.
> There are a lot of things to change in the DFSG, but why change the
> DFSG, the better contract is created : that's the FSDG! I do not see any
> problems for using it!
>
Even if all options are equal (and they are not here) there is also a
cost of change to consider. And typically one needs compelling
reasons/benefits to overcome the cost of changes (be it amendments to
DFSG and/or adoption of FSDG).
Also apart from "switch to FSDG" you have not yet provided any valid
argumentation. Debian welcomes participation from everyone, as long as
it's done in a constructive manner. And given the community we have,
that also typically means using quantitative & critically
thought-through argumentation. I'd recommend for you to learn more
about Debian project, study Debian Constitution, read past resolutions
and changes proposed, how successful/failed resolutions got proposed,
study Debian Organisational structure & delegations, join
debian-legal/debian-project mailing list, etc. before continuing this
discussion.
--
Regards,
Dimitri.
Reply to: