Re: Debian and FSF docs (was: Man pages for gcc)
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 12:41:01PM +0100, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> 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.
>
It's _not_ a Debian problem in one sense: it's the FSF's licence. Or we
could say "it's in non-free - not part of Debian - so we really don't care
and if it breaks, well so what"
> 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).
>
Do wait a little while and there may well ba e GR to that effect.
All the very best, as ever,
Andy CAter
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/GFDLPositionStatement
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei
> --
> http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Reply to: