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

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

On Sun, Aug 24, 2003 at 07:42:11PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dim 24/08/2003 à 10:56, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> > I propose to make a simple change in the DSFG (or document the license
> > evalutiang method in the policy, whatever): differentiate between 
> > 
> >  - pure FDL (which is obviously free)
> >  - tainted FDL (with invariant sections)
> It looks about 2 out of 3 of people who answered this survey disagree
> with your vision of pure FDL, so I'm afraid the "obviously" term should
> be removed from your analysis.

Eduard is well-known for disregarding the opinions of others.

For instance, he has been known to accuse Debian Developers of violating
clause 4 of the Debian Social Contract ("Our Priorities are Our Users
and Free Software") if they don't act on a bug report he has filed fast
enough to suit him.

I would, therefore, not expect him to take your advice.

G. Branden Robinson                |     Never attribute to malice that
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     which can be adequately explained
branden@debian.org                 |     by stupidity.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Hanlon's Razor

Attachment: pgp_Cn46ctibS.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: