Re: Documentation and Sarge's Release Critical Policy
>From Richard Stallman on the debian-legal list
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200308/msg01323.html):
>Second, the FSF is not working on changing the GFDL now. We intend to
>continue to use invariant sections that cannot be removed, as we have
>always done.
This seems to conflict with Anthony Towns's statement
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200308/msg01022.html):
>In short, some members of the FSF have asked for us to give them some
>more time to come up with a GFDL that's DFSG-free before we go all
>gung-ho about putting it in non-free and having bigger controversies.
>Martin (wearing his DPL hat) talked to me about this at debcamp.
Either:
1. These members of the FSF don't know what they're doing, and have no
influence
2. They're just trying to delay the removal of GFDL'ed material from main.
3. These members have a great deal of influence over RMS.
4. These members have the power to overrule RMS.
In the case of 1, I see no reason for keeping GFDL'ed material in main. In
the case of 2, it's a positively good idea to take it out as soon as
possible, so as to thwart their evil plans. ;-) Cases 3 and 4 seem
exceedingly unlikely, although they would be wonderful.
Branden's survey showed a majority belief that the GFDL never satisfied the
DFSG, and no belief that it satisfied it without case-by-case analysis.
All we need now is a survey which asks the following:
QUESTION.
What, if anything, which is distributed as part of Debian (in main, contrib,
and non-US) should be exempt from satisfying the Debian Free Software
Guidelines (as far as they are meaningful for it)?
Check all that apply:
[ ] Nothing at all should be exempt.
[ ] Legal notices required to distribute other material, and only distributed
for that reason (such as licenses for distributed programs) should be exempt.
[ ] All documentation should be exempt.
[ ] All essays and opinion pieces should be exempt.
[ ] Anything which isn't an executable program should be exempt.
[ ] Something else should be exempt (describe below):
I guess it should be asked with the usual
[ ] Are you a Debian Developer as of today?
[ ] Are you in the NM queue, waiting to become a Debian Developer?
I'd also be quite curious about:
[ ] Have you contributed copyrights to the FSF?
Hrrm, but I'm not up to tabulating it this month. Maybe someone else will.
;-)
Reply to: