Re: `free' in GNU and DSFG?

[MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop>]

Hiroki Horiuchi from Japan
> After reading your words, now I think The Free Software Definition is
> really permissive, but this very *permissiveness* made GNU's definition
> insufficient for Debian Project.
> 
> Am I right?

I don't think so.  The DFSG dates from 1997.  The Free Software
Definition only got that name around 2001.  Back in 1998, there were
only three freedoms... see
http://web.archive.org/web/19980126185518/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Think of them as two parallel developments for similar concepts -
one is a definition, the other is a set of guidelines to follow.
Like http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq#four_freedoms says:

    "[the FSF's four freedoms] are the Free Software Foundation's
    articulation of what it believes all software users deserve. (Note
    that full exercise of Freedoms 1 and 3 requires access to the
    source code.) They are elegantly phrased, and arguably an
    improvement in some ways on the earlier DFSG. However they refer
    to exactly the same set of freedoms as the DFSG. If a license is
    inconsistent with the FSF's four freedoms, you can be sure that
    Debian will also consider it non-free."

Hope that explains,
-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct