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

Re: {debian-legal} Re: Final Draft: Interpretive Guideline regarding DFSG clause 3

On 12 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> > What about a rant that goes the other way, about
> > how the GPL sucks? What about one that talks about why "free software"
> > beats "open source" any day? How about vice-versa? How about one that,
> > instead of talking about the need for free documentation, talks about
> > the need for better quality control/assurance in free software?
> Well, saying the GPL sucks is, generally, contrary to the Debian
> Projects goals.  Debian is essentially neutral on "free software"
> v. "open source".  Debian is in favor of quality control and assurance
> technologies.  

I'm uneasy with this approach. Does this mean that any time anyone wants
to tie an (invariant, non-removable) political-type statement to technical
docs, Debian has to take a position on that issue?

Stephen Turner, Cambridge, UK    http://homepage.ntlworld.com/adelie/stephen/
"This is Henman's 8th Wimbledon, and he's only lost 7 matches." BBC, 2/Jul/01

Reply to: