Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
Mathieu Roy <email@example.com>:
> Does everybody on that list, that thinks that GNU
> political/historical/philosophical/ texts must be DSFG compliant to be
> distributed by Debian, also thinks that the Debian logos must be DFSG
No. I think it's much easier for Debian to make an exception for
Debian's logo than for documentation produced by other organisations,
be they the FSF or O'Reilly.
> So the next step seems obvious to me, Debian have make a choice:
> - follow the strict definition of DFSG promoted by many
> persons on that list and move the Official Debian Logo to
> - think about an another policy for logos or
> political/philosophical/historical texts.
One could do that, but it wouldn't help because the FSF documentation
under discussion is neither a logo nor in the category of
Are we going round in circles here?