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

Re: DFSG#10

> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 08:26:33AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> > The Social Contract defines the distribution as being entirely free
> > software.  "copyrighted works distributable in digital form" don't
> > belong in the distribution.
> I'm pretty sure that the social contract is not asking us to avoid
> distribute copyrighted works distributable in digital form.

For anything not in the "distribution" (e.g. the web pages), I would
agree.  However, I _do_ think that the social contract is saying that
anything in the "distribution" must be free software.

> > > Under the new social contract, he believes this distinction is
> > > disallowed, because our free software guidelines are declared to
> > > be the standard for judgment for all works in the debian system.
> > > 
> > > In other words, before the release of the new social contract, there was
> > > ambiguity as to which definition of "software" was intended in the DFSG
> > > -- the release manager picked the most typical definition, and this was
> > > supported in his opinion by historical practice.
> > 
> > It was disallowed by the old social contract.  There was a clear
> > consensus, and I'm not the only one saying that [1] [2] [3].
> "It"?

The distinction.

Walter Landry

Reply to: