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

Re: Suggestions of David Nusinow, was: RPSL and DFSG-compliance - choice of venue



On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 03:17:13AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-08-23 21:16:06 +0100 ivan-debian@420.am wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 03:12:51AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >>I am dismayed and exasperated by the recent trend of bashing the
> >>debian-legal list collectively,
> >I don't think turning around and blaming the NM process is a 
> >reasonable 
> >reaction.
> 
> Great! Can everyone get past the mutual blaming and improve the NM 
> process then? It is really important that NMs understand that we 
> actually have real trouble to worry about when looking at copyrights, 
> trademarks and patents, and that "err on the side of putting 
> everything in main" really could hurt. Is asking a question about beer 
> prices (nm_pp.txt Q3, asked of me twice during NM IIRC) enough to do 
> that?
> 
> Actually, looking at nm_pp.txt, it's not really clear to me what 
> answers to 5a and 6 would be accepted, given the expressed views of 
> some DDs. Anyway, we probably need some questions about the more 
> interesting things like patent termination clauses or 
> copyright-enforced trademarks (debian logo?), as they are pretty 
> common problems. I'll have to let some of the gurus give good examples 
> to start, but I'll help if I can.

I find it appalling that believe you think that some answers to 5a and 6
should not be accepted.  Do you think Debian is some elite club where
only certain opinions should be accepted?

For those not familiar with NM, the questions are:

5a. The GNU Free Documentaion License (FDL) has been heavily discussed
    on debian-legal recently. Read
    http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.html and
    briefly explain how you feel about the including documents
    licensed under the FDL in main and what consequences of this
    position might be for Debian.

 6. Are there any sections of the DFSG or Social Contract that you
    might like to see changed? If so, why?


I only check to make sure the applicants are familiar with the issues
involved (both theoretical and practical).  Regarding the SC, I also ask
about the recent changes to the SC, how they would have voted, and what
they think the best course of action is.  I accept *all* answers, even
if the holier-than-thou folks on debian-legal would not approve.

-- 
You win again, gravity!



Reply to: