[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

Roland Mas <lolando@debian.org> a tapoté :

> Mathieu Roy, 2003-09-21 09:20:11 +0200 :
> > When you're forced to disregard the DFSG when working for Debian
> > (because, please, making an official logo is FOR Debian) and that do
> > not pose to you ethical problem, it means that the DFSG is too
> > ambiguous and do not serve its purpose by drawing the line at the
> > wrong place (being a pain instead of insuring the important
> > freedoms).
>   Maybe you don't understand that there's a difference between the
> Debian project, as an entity consisting of people, and the Debian
> operating system, as a collection of software.  The DFSG obviously
> applies to Debian-the-OS, not Debian-the-project (since
> Debian-the-project also produces stuff not in Debian-the-OS, namely
> contrib and non-free packages).
>   Or if you do, please be more specific which "Debian" you're
> referring to in your future posts.

I was specific enough. 

The Debian project is dedicated to the Debian OS. Without this
"collection of software", the Debian project is purposeless.

If the Debian project does not follow the rules that the Debian
project wrote itself for the Debian OS, the Debian project is somehow
inconsistent.  Way more inconsistent than the GNU project that always
follows its rules, for Software (Program) and Documentation.

If the Debian project rules cannot be always followed by Debian
Developers when they are working to achieve the Debian goal (the
Debian OS) and are not doing any harm to this goal (the Debian OS),
these rules are flawed. 

What the Debian project is currently doing when he publish his
official logo is likely saying "well, DFSG cannot apply to any
software part of Debian", unless you play with the words by pretending
that the _official logo_ is not part of Debian because it's not
packaged in main (funny to consider that the symbol of a project is
not part of the project, very unusual).

At the contrary of what is often said here, the DFSG are not so clear
when it comes to this kind of complex cases.

This logo issue can be seen like a political leader's wife asking the
man of the street to give coins to some kind of IRS while she get very
expensive holidays paid by the State. Sure, both things are not
clearly linked, but when you ask people to behave, you should behave
everytime too.
And if you are not able to follow your own principles, you have to
review these principles that apparently does not fit for you, despite
your goodwill. 


Mathieu Roy
  Not a native english speaker: 

Reply to: