Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
Glenn Maynard writes:
>On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 05:56:55PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I also think that this would be good to try and add to the DFSG. I
>> think it would make a position we've tacidly had here on -legal much
>> more clear than it is now.
>
>I think it derives directly from DFSG#1--certainly the spirit, even if
>the letter is debated. I think adding new guidelines that are subsets
>of existing ones would set a very bad precedent, since it implies that
>the DFSG is to be read literally, as a set of rules, instead of a set of
>guidelines.
Do you not believe that would be better than the current situation
where we have regular disagreements on some of this?
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"I've only once written 'SQL is my bitch' in a comment. But that code
is in use on a military site..." -- Simon Booth
Reply to: