Re: changes and standards documents
On Tue, Aug 11, 1998 at 05:47:12PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
>
> Marcus> We have promised an entirely free distribution, and that we
> Marcus> give back to the community. [opinion: it is my opininon that
> Marcus> we can give back better when we are allowed to improve
> Marcus> standards.] So, if we put any non-dfsg-free components in
> Marcus> main, the result will be quite different from that what we
> Marcus> call Debian at the moment.
>
> I think that the DFSG does not cover documents. Also, we
> promise an entirely free distribution for a reason -- and the reasons
> quoted by the proponents are very software specific. In the paragraph
> above, it is hard to see if you are objecting to something not
> falling under the dfsg becuse you have deeper reasons, or just
> becuase you have )pardon me, I do not know how to put this politely)
> fixated on the phrase dfsg free.
No offense taken. I think this indeed needs to be adressed, but only to give
you a short idea why I think that this is important:
a) Without documentation, you can't use the software.
b) Documentation and software are often integrated, for example in context
help system.
c) Source code documentation (for libraries, for example), are often
directly written in the source code and automatically generated.
d) Although you choose to ignore it completely --- I think *all points* of
the dfsg apply to documents for the *same reasons*. The points have to be
interpreted slightly different. I put my personal interpretation in my
posting and in the web (known adress).
I have deeper reasons for *every* demand by the dfsg interpreted in the
context of software documentations and even other data entities. They are
exactly the same reasons as for free software (again interpreted slightly
different). You know the reasons for software well, so I'm not insulting
your intelligence by summarizing them here. If you need a concrete list for
the reasoning, interpreted in the context of data entities, I'm prepared to
provide you with one. I just need a bit more time. If you only need the
reasoning for special points of the dfsg, please name them, so I can answer
you more quickly.
Although I'm not really offended, I'm a bit peeved about the fact that you
choose to ignore all my reasonings, and the excellent reasonings given by
other people on this list, and later tell me that I don't provide them.
This will only lead to a point where I think that you try to make us tired.
At the moment there is no reason to look at it this way, though, as the
discussion is still moving forward.
Thank you,
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: