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

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 06:59:45PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> One which isn't mentioned there is to amend the DFSG to allow the FDL and
> similar licences.
> Before someone schedules a MOAB test over my home, note that I am not
> advocating this course, merely that it should be mentioned and refuted.  If
> we don't do this, someone, somewhere is going to make the jump, and proceed
> to pester the Project to death with questions about why we don't just modify
> "that pesky ol' DFSG" and solve the problem that way.

Sure, it's certainly worth addressing this point in the FAQ.  It's a
question that we're likely going to hear time and again: "Why should the
FSF have to change?  Why don't *you* change?"

G. Branden Robinson                |     It's not a matter of alienating
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     authors.  They have every right to
branden@debian.org                 |     license their software however we
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     like.  -- Craig Sanders

Attachment: pgpuqOIXSsd3Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: