Re: `free' in GNU and DSFG?
Hiroki Horiuchi <x19290@gmail.com> writes:
> I was wondering why Free Software Definition was not sufficient for
> Debian Project. I thought this was permissive enough for the project.
The issue is less to do with the Free Software Definition, and more to
do with the FSF's position on how to apply that definition.
The FSF officially apply the Free Software Definition only to programs,
and not to other kinds of software.
Debian's Free Software Guidelines apply to all the software (whether
that software is interpreted as a program, a data file, a graphic image,
an audio file, a document, or any other interpretation of digital
information) in Debian.
> After reading your words, now I think The Free Software Definition is
> really permissive, but this very *permissiveness* made GNU's
> definition insufficient for Debian Project.
>
> Am I right?
Rather, the FSF is much more narrow than the Debian Project in choosing
what uses of a work should imply software freedom for the user.
The FSF applies that freedom only to using software if that software is
interpreted as a program, whereas the Debian Project requires the same
freedoms to apply no matter how the software is interpreted.
This is why the FSF does not consider it problematic to license software
interpreted as documentation more restrictively (through the non-free
provisions in the FDL) than software interpreted as programs (through
the GPL, which is a free-software license).
--
\ “Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex… |
`\ It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in |
_o__) the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein |
Ben Finney
Reply to: