On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:01:28 -0200 Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > > Should a bug be filed, in your opinion?
> >
> > Definitely.
>
> Please do.
OK, I'll file a bug ASAP.
>
> > No, I don't think leaving it unspecified is an incorrect
> > application, though it doesn't exactly follow the application
> > guidelines in the GFDL itself. I would tend to say that any work
> > under the GFDL which doesn't explicitly specify invariant sections
> > or cover texts should be assumed to have none.
>
> That's how I understand it myself.
I suspect that a strict interpretation of the GFDL could lead to the
opposite conclusion, but anyway...
>
> > This still doesn't make it DFSG-free, of course, so a bug should
> > still be filed. Thank you for raising this issue. If the Debian
> > project is going to advocate against the GFDL, we should certainly
> > not have any works under that license ourselves.
>
> Agreed. I didn't change it yet because I plan to do so for version 2,
> which is being written at the alioth's svn and because this was being
> ignored for sarge; I can do it for v1.x if it is a problem right now.
I'm very happy of hearing this! :)
I really appreciate your good will to relicense.
>
> Thanks,
Thanks to you, indeed! :)
--
Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpATP_l_QvPq.pgp
Description: PGP signature