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

Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL

On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 06:20:27PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> instead of a document
> like this one that warns about and criticises the FDL, perhaps Debian
> should issue a more general statement along the lines of: We have
> decided documentation in Debian must comply with the DFSG, and this will
> entail throwing the following documents out of the distribution, and
> certian licenses (FDL etc) are causing problems in this task. Just an
> idea and I don't feel like writing it myself, but it might be less
> inflammatory.

I think we probably need this too, but it can't be instead of a thing
about the FDL, since otherwise we'd just get "But the GNU FDL's a free
license -- it says so right in the name -- why're you throwing stuff
licensed under it out?"


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- 
        you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''

Attachment: pgpb3bWRfh8s6.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: