Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> I believe there are essentially two reconciliations we can have for
> each problem listed in the position statement [2]: Either "that does
> not make things non-free" or "that is not the intended reading of
> the license, stop nit-picking so much."
Or rather, I think that most people who voted this option felt that
while there may be problems with these particular issues, it was not
the intent of the FSF to make them issues from a freedom aspect.
[Indeed, from the conversations which were held on this list 3 years
ago that was basically the reasonable conclusion.]
In any case, we've been working with the FSF to resolve these issues
as well, so hopefully a new version of the GFDL will no longer posess
them.
Don Armstrong
--
It has always been Debian's philosophy in the past to stick to what
makes sense, regardless of what crack the rest of the universe is
smoking.
-- Andrew Suffield in 20030403211305.GD29698@doc.ic.ac.uk
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: