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

Re: Documentation licenses (GFDL discussion on debian-legal)

On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:54:30PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:01:28PM -0500, David Turner wrote:

> > >> Licensing aside, why would (and should) Debian distribute famous novels?
> > >> An installer for famous novels (c.f. gutenbook), sure, but why the
> > >> novels themselves?

> > > Because people might want them.  Because apt-get install
> > > alice-in-wonderland would be cool.  Better: why not?  

> > Because it's out of scope of Debian's charter.

> There's nothing wrong with distributing non-software in Debian, as
> long as it's still DFSG free.  One important reason for having that
> rule for non-software too is so that our users can completely
> understand a basic minimal set of freedoms without having to look at
> the details of each separate item.

I agree that the DFSG should also be applied to non-software.  However, I
also think that Debian's infrastructure shouldn't be burdened with lots
of data whose principal applications have nothing to do with software.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpQdmH4vXFhJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: