Re: Licenses for DebConf6
Scripsit Francesco Poli <email@example.com>
> That's why I consider this issue as an important one: every DebConf is
> an event through which we get public attention and can thus spread our
> philosophy. The message really works better if we act consistently with
> our philosophy, IMHO.
We do not have a philosophy that says that everything ought to be
We have a philosophy that says that we only distribute things in main
if they are DFSG-free. That is a different thing.
> Just like a Debian package doesn't enter main, until it meets Policy
> requirements (DFSG-freeness being one of them).
DebConf papers will not be distributed in main.
> Actually the C4P already requires some permissions from the authors:
> | Debconf requires non-exclusive publication rights to papers,
> | presentations, and any additional handouts or audio/visual materials
> | used in conjunction with the presentation.
And this requirement would be a no-op under your theory that a
DFSG-free license for the papers is required. Therefore I conclude
that your theory is wrong.
> What I suggest is simply adding one further condition.
For the record, I oppose this suggestion.
Henning Makholm Science, by its nature, is an uncertain undertaking, and
offers plenty of opportunity for failure no matter how you
approach it. Yet among the myriad ways to get nowhere, the only
fully reliable one is doing and thinking the same as everyone else.