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

Re: SURVEY: Is the GNU FDL a DFSG-free license?



Before I reply, I should add I still see it as wrong and misleading to apply
*software* guidelines to *documentation*, which to me are fundamentally
different beasts.  Thus, I see the question as rather misleading.

However, with the question narrowly framed as it is, regarding applying
the DFSG to the GFDL, I would concur as listed below.

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:09:54AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>   [   ]  The GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2, as published
>          by the Free Software Foundation, is not a license compatible
>          with the Debian Free Software Guidelines.  Works under this
>          license would require significant additional permission
>          statements from the copyright holder(s) for a work under this
>          license to be considered Free Software and thus eligible for
>          inclusion in the Debian OS.

If you hold this opinion, be aware that this would only work if that
permission is not specific to Debian.

>   [X  ]  The GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2, as published
>          by the Free Software Foundation, can be a license compatible
>          with the Debian Free Software Guidelines, but only if certain
>          restrictions stated in the license are not exercised by the
>          copyright holder with respect to a given work.  Works under
>          this license will have to be scrutinized on a case-by-case
>          basis for us to determine whether the work can be be considered
>          Free Software and thus eligible for inclusion in the Debian OS.
> 
>   [   ]  None of the above statements approximates my opinion.
> 
> Part 2. Status of Respondent
> 
>   Please mark with an "X" the following item only if it is true.
> 
>   [X  ]  I am a Debian Developer as described in the Debian
>          Constitution as of the date on this survey.



Reply to: