Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
The DFSG explicitly
> codifies my specific decision about TeX,=20
It does nothing of the sort; there is no mention of the word 'TeX' in
the DFSG.
Section 4 does precisely that, though without mentioning TeX by name.
In other words: I can live with Donald Knuth issuing a license in the
gray areay between free and non-free. I cannot live with the same thing
coming from the FSF.
The GFDL is free according to our standards. If you wish
to view the matter otherwise, you're entitled to your opinion.
Someone else criticized the idea (though no one had proposed it) of
giving the FSF special consideration; now you seem to be saying just
the opposite, that you believe in giving the FSF less cooperation that
you would give to anyone else. The consequences of such an approach
should be obvious: there will be no cooperation.
is that the Debian Project could end up being better friends with
the Open Source Initiative than with the FSF; while most Debian
Developers and users nowadays think the FSF is a "good" organization[1],
this might change if the FSF insists on having those Invariant Sections.\
The FSF has lived with contant criticism for many years. Say what you
wish; we will make no concession to threats like this.
Reply to: