Re: Anton's amendment
On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:33:57 +0200, Yavor Doganov <yavor@doganov.org> said:
> On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:40:13 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 16:40:28 +0000, Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org>
>> said:
>>> We already agree to distribute text we can't modify - that is, the
>>> licenses and attributions and the advertising clauses and so
>>> forth.
>>
>> Err. We distribute some works, with licenses attached to them that
>> allow us certain rights on the work in question. We are not legally
>> allowed to modify the license, so it is a good thing it is not part
>> of the Work. Advertising clauses are not about the work itself --
>> they are about ancillary activities, so are a different issue.
> The Invariant sections *cannot* be about the work itself by
> definition, i.e. they must not contain technical stuff that is
> relevant to the manual. Think of them as opinions of the authors
> that they consider important to advertise, and which can be
> countered/improved by adding an additional section. Similarly to
> the advertising clauses they cannot be removed. Certainly it is up
> to the authors' conscience to include such sections as well as how
> sound they may be. Abnormal use of this option of the GFDL may lead
> to a manual to become non-free, but it is not a direct consequence
> from the DFSG.
Err, these sections are part of the work (were they not part
of the work, we could remove them). As such, they are subject to the
modification requirement of DFSG 3 as written -- unless we change the
SC/DFSG to explicitly allow for a special dispensation.
> On the other hand, I guess everybody agrees that putting the text of
> the GPL in such a section is a necessary thing.
>> You are also free to explicitly state that the GFDL restrictions
>> are also to be considered free. Hence, the 3:1 requirement, to
>> allow that statement to be inserted into the DFSG.
> Perhaps you'll never change your position because this is your
> reading of the DFSG. But for the sake of democracy you have to
> assume that people think different, so it is not fair to impose your
> view.
Thankfully, Debian is not a democracy. We may vote on some
issues, but that does not mean we are a democratically run
organization. The powers of various offeces is spelled out in the
constitution.
In this specific case, I am not going to let the spectre of
democracy spur me into doing something I consider wrong. In a true
democracy, I would either do what my constituency required even if I
thought it wrong, or resign. In Debian, I am permitted to do what I
think is right, in as unbiased a manner as I can, until I am removed
from my post.
manoj
--
Census Taker to Housewife: Did you ever have the measles, and, if so,
how many?
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: