Re: OSD && DFSG - different purposes
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 11:02:41AM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> I don't want to quibble over semantics, but I don't think the meanings
> are as you suggest. The difference in meaning between "guideline" and
> "definition" would seem to be one of accuracy or rigorousness. For
> Debian's purposes I would say that our guideline is used much more like
> a definition. I can't see many conditions where we would waive *any* of
> the guideline's premises. It's tests, and our demand of compliance, is
> rigid and unforgiving.
I think the distinction is in the other direction. What do we do with
a license that meets the DFSG in every detail, but is still non-free?
Debian would refuse such a license. I asked Russell Nelson what OSI
would do in such a case, but I never received an answer.
Richard Braakman
Reply to: