Re: A possible GFDL compromise
David B Harris <david@eelf.ddts.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 02:50:09 -0400 (EDT)
> Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> > It would be fair to say that Debian has decided that the GFDL is not
> > free according to the DFSG. This opinion has only been getting
> > stronger and more unified over time. However, there is a significant
> > minority who believe that documentation should be judged by a
> > different standard than the DFSG. They have yet to enumerate what
> > those differences would be, though.
>
> Please don't be so quick about saying that. Lots of people said things
> like "there is a significant minority ..." or even "the majority of ..."
> when it came to saying the GFDL was fully Free. That was obviously
> debunked (and quite soundly as well, I might add). Let's not make that
> mistake again eh? :)
I bear the seemingly unusual distinction of actually having read all
of the posts about this topic to debian-legal. I stand behind that
characterization.
Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu
Reply to: