Comparison of Raul Miller/20040119-13 and Andrew Suffield/GR Editorial
I realize that Raul Miller has not proposed his GR, and intends to hold
off until at least tomorrow.
This comparison is based on
Raul Miller's DRAFT, <[🔎] 20040119082551.T23413@links.magenta.com>
Andrew Suffield's GR, <[🔎] 20040120154939.GA19911@suffields.me.uk>
I'm going to ignore bland procedural text (like the first paragraph of
Raul's draft). Also, I've taken the liberty of re-wrapping lines.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
1. Debian will remain 100% free | 1. Debian will remain 100% free
software |
Pretty much the same thing. Slight wording difference.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
Debian exists to distribute a |
general purpose system composed |
of entirely free software.
Raul seems to define Debian's purpose explicitly here; Andrew leaves it
(I assume) implicit. Andrew's "we promise..." sentence seems similar.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
As | We provide the guidelines that
we use
there are many definitions of | to determine if a work is "free"
free software, we use the | in the document entitled "The
Debian
"Debian Free Software | Free Software Guidelines".
Guidelines" to determine if |
software is free. |
Raul keeps the original rationale for creating the DFSG. Andrew prefers
to shorten it.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
| We
| promise that the Debian system
and
| all its components will be free
| according to these guidelines.
Andrew makes it very clear that Debian is free; both also state that
the system will never depend on non-free items later on. Raul's
explicit giving Debian purpose, above, probably serves many of the same
goals as this sentence.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
We will also |
We will
support our users who develop | support people who create or
use both
and run other software on Debian | free and non-free works on
Debian.
-- free or non-free --
AFAICT, these say the same thing, just slightly differently.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
but we |
We
will never make the system | will never make the system
require the
depend on non-free software. | use of a non-free component.
Again, the same thing.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
2. We will give back to the free | 2. We will give back to the free
software community | software community
|
When we write new components of the | When we write new components of
the
Debian system, we will license them | Debian system, we will license
them
in a manner consistent with the | in a manner consistent with the
Debian Free Software Guidelines. We | Debian Free Software
Guidelines. We
will make the best system we can, so | will make the best system we
can, so
that free works will be widely | that free works will be widely
distributed and used. We will | distributed and used. We will
communicate things such as bug | communicate things such as bug
fixes, improvements and user | fixes, improvements and user
requests to the "upstream" authors | requests to the "upstream"
authors
of works included in our system. | of works included in our system.
Word for word, these two are identical.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
3. We will not hide problems | 3. We will not hide problems
|
We will keep our entire bug report | We will keep our entire bug
report
database open for public view at all | database open for public view
at all
times. Reports that people file | times. Reports that people file
online will promptly become visible | online will promptly become
visible
to others. | to others.
Identical, again.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
4. Our priorities are our users and | 4. Our priorities are our users
and
free software | free software
|
We will be guided by the needs of our | We will be guided by the needs
of
users and the free software | our users and the free software
community. We will place their | community. We will place their
interests first in our priorities. | interests first in our
priorities.
We will support the needs of our | We will support the needs of our
users for operation in many | users for operation in many
different kinds of computing | different kinds of computing
environments. We will not object to | environments. We will not
object to
non-free works that are intended to | non-free works that are
intended to
be used on Debian systems, or | be used on Debian systems, or
attempt to charge a fee to people | attempt to charge a fee to
people
who create or use such works. We | who create or use such works. We
will allow others to create | will allow others to create
distributions containing both the | distributions containing both
the
Debian system and other works, | Debian system and other works,
without any fee from us. In | without any fee from us. In
furtherance of these goals, we will | furtherance of these goals, we
will
provide an integrated system of | provide an integrated system of
high-quality materials with no legal | high-quality materials with no
legal
restrictions that would prevent such | restrictions that would prevent
such
uses of the system. | uses of the system.
Identical, minus one typographical spacing difference that might of
even been caused by me.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
| If paragraph 5 is still
present, it
| is replaced with the following
| text:
Andrew clearly intends his resolution to not conflict with the non-free
GR.
Raul's resolution makes no provision on this (I think Raul intends his
to be on
the same ballot as the non-free GR, but Andrew wants his on a seperate
ballot.)
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
5. Software that doesn't meet our | 5. Works that do not meet our
free
free-software standards | software standards
Andrew's GR uses the word "works" instead of "software", probably to
clarify
that this applies to things that not everyone calls software, such as
documentation, images, etc. I think this arose out of the GFDL
discussions on
-legal.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
We acknowledge that some, but not | We acknowledge that some of our
all, of our users require the use of | users require the use of works
that
software which does not conform to | do not conform to the Debian
Free
the Debian Free Software Guidelines. | Software Guidelines.
Raul puts in the phrase "but not all". I'm not sure what purpose this
serves, because "some" already says that.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
In order to accommodate these users, | We have
created
we have created "contrib" and | "contrib" and "non-free" areas
in
"non-free" areas in our internet | our archive for these works.
archive. |
Raul adds in a transition phrase and the word "internet" (Raul: isn't
Internet
capitalized?). I don't think this is all that different.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
The software in "non-free" |
The
satisfies some, but not all, of our | packages in these areas are not
part
guidelines | of the Debian system, although
they
| have been configured for use
with
| Debian.
These are fairly different. Raul does not include the statement that
these are
not part of Debian. Doesn't leaving that out cause a problem when
compared to
clause 1?
Also, I'm not sure that software in non-free has to satisfy any of the
guidelines. Certainly not DFSG 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, or 10. I'm not sure
why
they'd have to satisfy 7 or 9, either, provided it is still legal for
Debian to
distribute it. So this may be a material change.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
and we do not guarantee | We encourage CD
all software in the non-free area | manufacturers to read the
licenses
may be distributed in other ways. | of the packages in these areas
and
| determine if they can
distribute the
| packages on their CDs.
Raul's wording covers more than CD manufacturers. Raul's wording also
seems to
suggest that we guarantee the distributability of software in main.
Raul Miller | Andrew Suffield
--------------------------------------
|--------------------------------------
For those who need to run software | Thus,
we do not distribute, free or | although non-free works are not
a
non-free, we support worthy | part of Debian, we support
their use
application binary interface | and provide infrastructure for
standards and namespace management | non-free packages (such as our
bug
standards. Additionally, we will | tracking system and mailing
lists).
work to find, package and support |
free alternatives to non-free |
software so people who use only free |
software can work with users of |
non-free software. |
Both Raul and Andrew affirm (again) that we support the use of non-free
works.
Raul additionaly addes in that we will support ABI and namespace
standards
(like the LSB, FHS, etc.) Also, Raul adds in that we will work towards
free
alternatives.
Raul does not state we provide our bug tracking system for non-free
packages,
which Andrew does.
That's all, folks!
Special thanks to :set ve=all and CTRL-V. I'm glad I remembered about
you after only doing the first clause completely by hand. Next week:
Could -d of helped?
Reply to: