On Du, 31 oct 21, 17:37:10, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > This is because GNU releases their documentation under a different license > > than their source code. And Debian considers the GNU documentation > > license to be non-free (rightly so, because it prohibits distributing > > modified versions). > > FWIW, it's not nearly as clear cut as you make it sound, because it does > not prevent distribution of all modified versions. > > It does require one particular section to be kept unmodified (IIRC it's > the section that promotes the FSF philosophy), but the bulk is Free in > the usual sense of allowing redistribution of modified versions. As far as I understand[1] further modifications can add other invariant sections as well and humans have demonstrated a remarkable capacity of abusing such loopholes. > I find this state of affair rather sad and am disappointed by both > Debian and the FSF for not finding a compromise. It ends up promoting > the use of the non-free repository, which I think neither project wants. At the very least Debian could split non-free into sections or add more areas (non-free firmware being another obvious candidate for splitting out). [1] https://wiki.debian.org/GFDLPositionStatement Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature