On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:43:08PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Thursday, Aug 7, 2003, at 13:43 US/Eastern, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > >We cannot just go ahead and ignore all that, saying > >that "we don't have a definition for anything other than free > >software, so we'll take that definition and apply it to whatever > >people throw in our general direction." > > Right now, it's not that we can, it's that we must. Indeed, from a practical point of view, but such is not relevant for what I meant. > The Social Contract > clearly says that Debian will remain 100% free _software_. Not "free > software and documentation" or "free software, free documentation, and > free data" or anything else. > > If we want to come up with a separate Debian Free Documentation > Guidelines, we can. With a GR, we can issue it. But will still have > that Social Contract to deal with. And the constitutional amendment to > allow changing that is still, AFAIK, tabled. "tabled"? > BTW: As far as this list deciding on its own, the Project Leader has > delegated deciding compliance with the DFSG to the ftp-masters. What I propose isn't about DFSG compliance. It's about DFSG applicability. -- Wouter Verhelst Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org "An expert can usually spot the difference between a fake charge and a full one, but there are plenty of dead experts." -- National Geographic Channel, in a documentary about large African beasts.
Description: PGP signature