Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
Peter S Galbraith <email@example.com> a tapoté :
> Mathieu Roy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I do not see either why RMS's political essays should be free in the
> > DFSG-sense either, even when included in a documentation.
> As someone asked in another thread:
> Did you really pass P&P ?
What does this question mean? Does Debian impose on applicant to
believe that a political essay should be ruled by the DFSG?
I do not think so. If it is an implicit law, please make it explicit.
However, I know what is the DFSG and I know what I should do when
contributing for Debian and what I should not do. I am a very lawful
Now, I think that the question is not really what the DFSG
allows. Because it's pretty clear that the DSFG does not allow GFDLed
documentation with Invariant section.
The question is: do we think that tolerating this non-DFSG essays in
some GFDLed documentation is more harmful to Debian than removing
these GNU manuals?
That's the question.
Not a native english speaker: