Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL
On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
>On 20030429T133608-0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
>> Does anyone feel that their opinion does not roughly fall into one of the
>> following categories? If so, it would be nice to get a short statment of
>> opinion which stands on it's own rather than rebutting someone else's
>> statement.
>
> You are completely missing the camp that says that documentation is
> software:
>
> Documents under the GFDL are software and hence must be judged by the
> standard set by the DFSG.
This is a camp which includes me. I had hoped these folks would feel
included in:
>> c) The GFDL would not be free if applied to software, and is not free
>> when applied to documents. There may or may not be a distinction
>> between the two, but it is unreasonable to have different standards of
>> freedom or different standards of whether Debian should distribute
>> them.
I can split this into two if desired, to cover those who believe there is
no useful distinction and those who believe there is a distinction but
Debian should hold all things to the same standards of freedom.
> (There are similar variants here as in what you discussed.)
There are likely variants of all of the points of view. I hope to keep
the number of basic positions small, so the major topics can be discussed
before (or concurrent to but seperately) the variations.
--
Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>
Reply to: