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

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

On 2003-08-23 02:33:12 +0100 John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
Are you saying that you would be amendable to the idea of a DFSG that is slightly modified to make it more applicable to documentation as well?

I am totally opposed to modifying the DFSG. They are already clearly applicable to documentation in Debian in an obvious way. I would support an explanation that made it clear the difference between guidelines and examples, and a massively-hyperlinked version that specified every word as far as we can. Some posters claimed to have trouble with each of those.

(Considering the differences between software and documentation I pointed
out in a previous post)

You seem to have generally declined to consider whether documentation in Debian is a subset of software (that is to say: they are different, but we can/should treat documentation in Debian as software) and only restate that they are not identical (although I am not sure anyone claims otherwise). I apologise if this is unfair and I just missed your messages for some reason.

MJR/slef   My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
      http://mjr.towers.org.uk/   jabber://slef@jabber.at

Reply to: