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

Re: Summary: Is Open Publication License v1.0 compatible?, was Re: GPL+ for docs

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:07:18AM -0500, Simon Law wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:08:29PM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> > Here's a summary, since it doesn't seem like anyone has anything more to
> > say on the subject:
> 	Hmm...  I hate to seem authoritarian, but I'd like to see a
> little more formality in d-l summaries.
> 	What would be nice is a draft to go out a couple of days before
> the actual summary is published.  This allows people who are busy to get
> their last words in.

I agree.

> 	As well, it would be nice to quote the entire license and our
> exact concerns in the summary.  This way, people looking through our
> archives in the future won't have to do more research tracking down lost
> texts.

I agree.  Furthermore, when we can ground an objection on the DFSG, we
should do so.

G. Branden Robinson                |       If atheism is a religion, then
Debian GNU/Linux                   |       health is a disease.
branden@debian.org                 |       -- Clark Adams
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: