Re: Proposed addition to Debian web pages re: GNU FDL
Andreas Barth wrote:
>I don't think it's good manners to try to push a certain view by
>putting it on the web sites. No, first finish the discussion in d-l,
>and the you _might_ put additions on the web site. (Though I think
>it's even then not the right place for that; but that's a different
>point of view.)
The discussion *is* finished. Virtually nobody believes that the GFDL
with Invariant Sections or Cover Texts passes the DFSG. A majority
believe that the GFDL doesn't pass the DFSG even *without* Invariant
Sections or Cover Texts, thanks to the overbroad "technical measures"
clause. (Ask around if you don't know what's wrong with it; nobody has
given any argument for why this isn't a problem besides "Oh, that's not
what they *meant* to say", which is no good.)
Bruce Perens has confirmed that when he wrote the DFSG he intended it to
apply to everything on the Debian CD, including documentation. The
English-language meaning of the Social Contract requires that Debian
will "remain... software" (this has also been discussed to death). So
if you believe that documentation isn't software and the DFSG shouldn't
apply, then you must conclude that Debian shouldn't generally distribute
documntation (at least without a General Resolution).
So in fact there is consensus, and it's just a matter of explaining the
reasons to people arriving late. Which is *precisely* why I was
proposing an easy-to-find location explaining the consensus which has
been reached after over two years of discussions.
Reply to: