Re: http://forums.debian.net in beta
On 2004-09-14 21:08:19 +0100 Intense Red <intnsred@debianhelp.org>
wrote:
debianHELP has been around since 2Q/3Q 2000. The decision was
made at that
time to put all content of the site under the GFDL. This is
explained in the
Site FAQ
<http://www.debianhelp.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=FAQ&file=index&myfaq=yes&id_cat=1#4>.
This FAQ is beligerant, argumentative and seems outright wrong in
places (such as the FDL being a modified GPL). It also needlessly FUDs
the Debian consensus about the FDL. Its style is confused: GFDL but
not GGPL?
In today's posts, IntnsRed portrays debian's long contemplation of the
FDL as some sort of implicit endorsement of it, and the eventual
consensus as a sudden U-turn. This seems a very odd view to me.
Looking elsewhere on the site, debianHELP still contains the MPL
misreporting from earlier in the summer, posted by a user who
threatened me with physical violence in posts on another site. I was
then told that his computer was hijacked, so I'm not sure why the
posts are still on debianHELP.
Avoid debianHELP for now. It's too heavy on the militant and too lax
on the FREE. Nothing submitted to the site is free software or can
form part of free software. So much for "we're strong believers in the
concept of free software". Hopefully they will fix it sooner than
IntnsRed currently plans. Option 2 (change licence for new content)
seems the way to go, gradually reducing the proportion of the site
afflicted by the bug, rather than Option 3 (wait for current site to
die) that continually increases it. Other things could also work
towards fixing the bug, such as putting "relicense my posts" buttons
on user profile pages.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
http://www.thewalks.co.uk stand 13,Lynn Carnival,12 Sep
Reply to: