Re: Honesty in Debian (was Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 01:52:06PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> In reality, Debian used to allow "non-free non-programs" in Debian -- but it
> did so while issuing a Social Contract which said that Debian didn't allow
> them in. That was untruthful on the part of Debian.
Debian did so before appropriate consideration was given to the issue. Once
it was raised, it was determined that free documentation (for example) is
important, and that it should be held to the same standards, and that the
failure to do so was a serious problem. There's no such case here: nobody
(else) seems to consider license texts a real problem.
So, I don't consider this a serious problem. I'd rather not spend more time
on this. If you manage to convince many people of your position, more power
to you. I'll preserve my energy for a more serious issue (the DFSG#4 patch
exception, which allows works in Debian which effectively prohibit code reuse).