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

Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 07:19:24PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 05:38:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Note that while Peter is currently in the n-m queue (on hold pending
> > > further response to T&S checks apparently), he's not yet a developer,
> > > and his expectations shouldn't be inferred to be those of the developers
> > > as a whole.
> > > 
> > > Working out whether those expectations match those of the developers as
> > > a whole is what this GR -- and the discussion preceeding it -- is about.
> > > I'd strongly discourage people who participate in the discussion (whether
> > > you've run the n-m gauntlet or not) from dismissing developers' concerns
> > > about this as a "red herring": if you're right, you shouldn't be afraid to
> > > discuss the reasons why you're right in detail when asked.
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:56:25AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > To add to that, if i where Peter, i may feel slightly offended by the tone of
> > your reply as well as the content of it. You are the DPL, and as thus speak
> > with the authority given by the whole project, and i think you should as such
> > be a more careful in your wording.
> I was entirely careful in my wording. Peter is in the n-m queue, he
> isn't a developer, and while he has every right to his personal views,
> as do you and as do I, those views don't necessarily match those of the
> majority of other developers or the project as a whole, and we should

Well, the only one who could claim that his views have some representativity
of the project as a whole is you, everyone else is just expressing his own
opinion, be he a DD or a guy from NM or some random poster.

> be very careful not to accidently quash discussion of other points of
> view by being so vehement in our own views that other people don't think
> their view is welcome.

Well. do we chip hardare, and as thus have the content of their ROMs covered
by the DFSG ? I am not aware of such a situation, and altough Peter may have
not said it in the best way, remember that for all those non-native english
speakers there is a language barrier there, which may not be visible
immediately, but which causes choice of non-perfectly-adequate wordings
because of lack of vocabulary, or missing the subltetlies of various wording
possibilities and misjudging the strength of them.

You on the other side don't have this excuse :)


Sven Luther

Reply to: