Re: GNU FDL 1.2 draft comment summary posted, and RFD
On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 04:06:39PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> To spell this out a little more clearly:
>
> I'm not comfortable with calling this license the "Debian Free Content
> License" -- or the "Debian" anything, for that matter -- if the license
> can be exercised in such a way that the work isn't DFSG-free.
>
> To do so would feel hypocritical to me. If we're going to put our name
> on it, we need to not be turning around and saying "well, yeah, it's our
> license, but we STILL won't let you into main with it". That's just
> going to aggravate people even more than they already are.
Do The Right Thing. If doing so exposes flaws in the DFSG, they need to
be changed, rather than hobbling the work-in-progress to fit with guidelines
which may or may not have adequately considered the present situation.
Yes, I realise that this may be difficult. However, you could always come
up with an "ideal" version, and a "current-DFSG-compliant" version, and
include a clause similar to the GPL's "or any subsequent version", so that
if/when the DFSG catch up with The Right Thing, then the ideal license
can be used.
Cheers,
Nick
--
Nick Phillips -- nwp@lemon-computing.com
Give him an evasive answer.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: