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

Re: QPL and non-free

Matthew Garrett writes:

> Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> wrote:
> > Matthew Garrett writes:
> > 
> >> I'm discussing definition of free software. The FSF don't believe that
> >> the GFDL is a free software license.
> > 
> > They call it free for something that Debian calls software.  Why not
> > harp over the ambiguous usage of "software" rather than its subset
> > "free software"?  I cannot imagine this conversation being any more
> > productive than that one.
> We changed the social contract explicitly because not everyone defines
> software to cover things like documentation. The FSF have made it clear
> that they don't consider the two to be the same catagory for a very long
> time.

You accept that different people mean different things when they say
"software".  Why is it a problem when the same applies to "free

Michael Poole

Reply to: