Re: handling Mozilla with kid gloves [was: GUADEC report]
leader@debian.org wrote:
> > Your messages suggested that you'd review "after a few months"
> > mainly to see who is summarising, so now seems like a good
> > opportunity. Do you have other comments about whether this turned
> > out like you imagined?
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding. I think the situation has improved
> but that -legal could do a better job at communicating their ideas to
> people who don't have time to follow the list. For example, I don't
> think that many people are aware of
> http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ and the page is also fairly
> incomplete; http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?DFSGLicences should
> probably be merged into the former or integrated in some way.
I think that http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ is a mistake which
should be removed or drastically changed. It divides debian-legal and
has been a gift to those who always seek to criticise contributors on
more than one occasion. Can you suggest more productive content?
See also: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/06/msg00521.html
I stopped making the periodic summaries and no-one has complained yet.
I don't think that communicating what -legal is discussing is very
interesting to most debian people. I am keeping notes for my own sake at
http://people.debian.org/~mjr/licences.html but I am even more suspicious
of anonymous wiki users describing licences than I am of people who
don't give enough references. Should the web site even just contain
debian-legal user/developer/drafter FAQs?
Hoping for swifter replies,
--
MJR/slef
Reply to: