Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 11:01:19PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> > However, Option 1 was the consensus of this list, and thus we've been
> > overridden[0]. I feel that we now need to figure out why the project as
> > a whole has rejected the draft position statement [2] and render our
>
> The GFDL has more serious problems than most licenses, and Debian has stuck
> its rubber stamp on them; we're stuck with them, probably for good. I'm
> sure any pretense from the FSF of trying to fix these problems will be
> dropped entirely now, since Debian has said they're OK. The project has
> asserted that onerous practical problems are acceptable.
An interesting practical effect of this vote is that only FSF
documents are excluded from main.
Cheers,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu
Reply to: