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

Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem

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.


> 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

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.

Attachment: pgpKb_qeYRbH2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: