Re: GFDL freedoms
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 08:19:11AM -0400, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 12:29 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I remain unconvinced that the freedoms required for documentation are
> > the same freedoms required for software. I think the best way to fix
> > the current situation is to propose the Debian Free Documentation
> > Guidelines and modify the SC appropriately. More on this when I have
> > a first draft.
> Don't forget to do the Debian Free Images Guidelines, the Debian Free
> Sounds Guidelines, the Debian Free Music Guidelines, the Debian Free
> Database Guidelines and the Debian Free Video Guidelines. Debian uses
> all these types of content for games, Web applications, educational
> stuff, desktop themes and backgrounds, dot dot dot.
> Not all non-program software is documentation, after all. And not all
> documentation is plain text.
I think you're being sarcastic, but I do think that we probably
need a Debian Free Images Guidelines document since there is at
least some disagreement around what constitutes a free image.
Here's a recent one between Matthew Garrett and Andrew Suffield:
However, there is no pressing need for one, so it's sufficient to come
up with a DFDocG for now. Or is your sarcasm aimed at making me realise
that what we really need is a Debian Free Data Guidelines document?
I really wish you'd been a bit more constructive.
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain