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

Re: [summary] Interpretive Guideline regarding DFSG clause 3

Oohara Yuuma <oohara@libra.interq.or.jp> writes:

> * Everyone on this thread agreed that works licensed under GNU FDL
>   with no Invariant Sections are completely DFSG free.

It's possible that some people might similarly object to Front Cover
Texts or Back Cover Texts; it hasn't been discussed.  But if you steer
clear of all such, everyone is agreed.

> * Everyone on this thread agreed that copyright notices may be invariant.


> * Almost everyone on this thread wanted to have the emacs manual and
>   the gdb manual (both have invariant texts) in main.

Ideally, yes, but not necessarily in their current form.

> * Several guidelines on invariant texts were proposed, including
>   a proportional limit, a fixed limit, the zero-byte limit (that is,
>   no invariant text is allowed for packages in main) and a flexible
>   "judge with your common sense" limit.


> * What the DFSG 1 ("Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software") exactly
>   means is also discussed.  Some interpretations are:
>   1) "Software" which is not "Free" is not part of Debian
>   2) that which is not "Software" is not part of Debian

Yes, but that's a side issue, and not really so relevant.

> * No guideline or interpretation proposed in this thread achieved
>   enough consensus.

So far, but it isn't over yet.

> * This thread was mentioned in the Debian Weekly News (December 5th, 2001).

Yeah, it was mentioned.

Reply to: