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

Re: Legal questions about some GNU Emacs files

On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 05:09:05PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
> Mark Rafn <dagon@dagon.net> writes:
> > Sure, but for some of us, _software_ is a very broad category. For
> > me, it includes all works which can be encoded as a stream of bits.
> wow, what can i say?! everything is software!? an infinite number of
> monkeys, at an infinite number of keyboards will eventually define all
> that is software... the only problem is some bit streams are more
> meaningful than others.
> i wouldn't want to live in your world.

	Let me go out on a philosophical limb here and go from some more
stable premises.

Axiom: All Debian Developers agree with the Debian Social Contract.

Fact 1; Debian's social contract states in section 1.

    1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software
       We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely
       free software.  As there are many definitions of free software, 
       we include the guidelines we use to determine if software is 
       "free" below. [...]

Consider case 1: Documentation is not software.

1A. Documentation is part of the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution.

1B. If the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution contains non-software, it cannot
be comprised entirely of free software.


1C. Debian must purge non-software from the Distribution.

Consider case 2: Documentation is equivalent to software.

2A. Documentation cum software is part of the Debian GNU/Linux

2B. Debian GNU/Linux has a set of guidelines for free software.

2C. Debian GNU/Linux must not contain non-free software, as we can see
from 1C.


2D. Debian GNU/Linux must not contain non-free documentation cum

	Feel free to propose that we rip out all documentation from the
distribution and place it in contrib or non-free, as appropriate.


Reply to: