Re: motion to take action on the unhappy GNU FDL issue
Scripsit Sunnanvind Fenderson <email@example.com>
> Well, listening to Georg Greve it sounded like the FSF wanted an
> official statement from Debian regarding the problems with
> non-removability of invariant sections.
I don't think the FSF is prepared to change their licensing practise
no matter how eloquent statements we can draft here. IIRC, a couple of
iterations back we had a subthread on d-l where Stallman himself
participated. He did not seem to attach any particular weight by our
> In my very humble opinion, Debian should try giving them that before
> taking (what would appear to be) the more hostile actions suggested
> by you.
The three initial of Branden's proposed actions do not seem to be
hostile. They say that we make up our mind and draft a self-contained
descriptions of why we think the invariant-section stuff (etc.) is
evil. Surely that is a prerequisite for doing *anything* else than
bitch about the problem internally on debian-legal.
Henning Makholm "So? We're adaptable. We'll *switch missions*!"