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

Re: Validity of DFSG #10

On 5 January 2013 10:35, Vasudev Kamath <kamathvasudev@gmail.com> wrote:

> In brief Jakub Wilk wanted to get rid of DFSG #10 as it is creating
> ambiguous situation by pointing to licenses which have multiple
> variants. rather than rephrasing him I'm attaching his mail with his
> permission to this.
> In my opinion DFSG #10 is not a guideline but a statement giving example
> compared to other DFSG's so even I feel it is better to drop DFSG
> #10. So I would like to formally start a discussion on this topic
> here. Please share your suggestions.

I see #10 as a guideline, is a piece of advice, «follow this as
example of what we consider free».

The web points to the last GPL, not the v3. Of course, there are
differences, but the DFSG means all the GPL are DFSG-compatible. And
that BSD is as Debian see the BSD. Maybe this should be specified.
Althought I've seen that what we call the BSD the rest of the people
call it too BSD.

Jose Luis Rivas. San Cristóbal, Venezuela.
GPG 0xCACAB118 0x7C4DF50D
http://joseluisrivas.net/acerca - http://ghostbar.ath.cx/about

Reply to: