Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:13:35 +0200
Message-id: <20030911141335.GD5622@mails.so.argh.org>
Mail-followup-to: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, debian-legal@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <2922934E-E3EA-11D7-93C6-00039317863E@suespammers.org>
References: <m3fzj6rzaw.fsf@ulysse.nib> <2922934E-E3EA-11D7-93C6-00039317863E@suespammers.org>

* Anthony DeRobertis (asd@suespammers.org) [030911 02:05]:
> On Tuesday, Sep 9, 2003, at 07:12 US/Eastern, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> >This has been discussed recently and it was so not clear.

> The poll held recently made it very clear. Who has changed their 
> position since then?

I.

Former "DFSG is not the right thing to measure", now "GFDL is not free
according to DFSG".


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Reply to:

References:
- Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
  - From: Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org>
- Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
  - From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>

Prev by Date: Re: A possible GFDL compromise
Next by Date: Re: getting personalities out of the FSF-Debian argument
Previous by thread: Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
Next by thread: Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread