Re: A possible GFDL compromise
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> a tapoté :
> > I hope that the Debian developers will vote to include GFDL-covered
> > manuals in Debian. Whatever Debian decides, some amount of cooperation
> > ought to be possible between the GNU Project and Debian.
>
> You are asking for one-way cooperation.
>
> I'm not asking Debian to do anything for the GNU Project in regard to
> the GFDL. I have been presenting reasons why it is proper, and
> better, for Debian to accept GFDL-covered documents.
>
> Although you perceived my words as a sort of demand, they were
> actually meant as just the opposite. I was saying that we will try to
> continue cooperating with Debian in other areas, even if Debian
> decides not to use our manuals.
>
> We have stated many times why we
> don't want GFDL'ed documents in Debian,
>
> You and some other Debian developers have said this, but you do not
> speak for all Debian developers any more than I do. You are trying to
> persuade them, and I am too. I expect that eventually they will vote
> on a decision.
And according to the Debian Social Contract #4, Debian "priorities are
[Debian] users and Free Software".
Not only the developers point of view would be interesting, but also
"the needs of [Debian] users" (don't they like the Emacs
manual?) should be studied.
Not to mention the fact that many contributors to Debian (translators
for instance) are not considered officially as Debian developers,
which makes Debian voting system awkward, especially about
documentation.
So even a Debian developers's vote is probably not enough to make that
decision. Sure, normally Debian developers *should* understand what is
the best for Debian users but from what I rode on that list, it's not
sure at all for several of them.
--
Mathieu Roy
Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
Not a native english speaker:
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english
Reply to: