Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL

[Anthony DeRobertis <anthony@derobert.net>]

Francesco Poli wrote:

>On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 17:23:32 -0500 Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
>
>[...]
>  
>
>>However, maybe once we come up with a way to reconcile the Project's
>>decision with the text of the DFSG and GFDL, we should ask the project
>>to approve it (assumably via GR).
>>    
>>
>
>I'm not sure I understand what you mean...
>Could you please elaborate?
>  
>
[Note: When I say "the Project" below, I of course realize that many
DD's disagree with the result of 2006-01. However, GR's are the official
method to make decisions on behalf of the entire Debian Project, and a
decision has been made.]

The Project essentially told us our conclusion — the GFDL is not free —
is wrong in the case where there are no invariant sections. The Project
did not tell us why. There are several ways we can take this:

   1. The Project intends this to be a one-time thing, applying only to
      the GFDL: No effect on future judgements of licenses is intended.
      I don't believe this is a valid interpretation of the GR as that'd
      require a 3:1 supermajority to achieve (just like Amendment B),
      and the ballot option did not require that.
   2. The Project intends us to change how we interpret licences as they
      believe we have come to an incorrect conclusion. I believe this is
      the correct way to understand and act on the GR.
   3. Completely ignore the GR, decide the Project has gone mad. I think
      this would be a horrible approach.

If we go with (2), we need to figure out where we (according to the
Project) have erred in our judgement, interpretation, etc. I believe we
should:

   1. Find new ways to interpret the GFDL and (if necissary) the DFSG to
      bring the GFDL w/o invariant sections into compliance with the
      DFSG. Note that I *strongly* prefer that we change our
      interpretation of the GFDL as opposed to give up freedoms in the
      DFSG. I think it is reasonable to believe the Project thinks that
      many of our objections are nitpicking and silly — at least far
      more reasonable to believe that than to think they believe free
      software can demand chmod -R a+rX $HOME
   2. Once we have come up with a list of how we intend to reconcile the
      GFDL and DFSG (as above), present this as a GR for the Project to
      approve.

Now, if the Project approves the GR, fine. We will then have an
extremely clear idea of where we stand. If the Project rejects the GR,
well, we'll worry about that then.