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

Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:32:46PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, the only one who could claim that his views have some representativity
> of the project as a whole is you, everyone else is just expressing his own
> opinion, be he a DD or a guy from NM or some random poster.

Anyone can claim their views are representative of the project, and
everyone -- including myself -- would be wrong to do so. 

The project has procedures for establishing its views on subjects: be that
by package maintainers having opinions about their packages, discussions
on mailing lists, setting policies, decisions by delegates, the technical
committee or the project secretary, or having a vote about it.

There are a few people who are authorised to speak on behalf of the
project, including myself, Steve McIntyre as 2IC [0], and Joey Schulze as
press officer. But none of those people get to cast their own views as
the project's -- they simply have been entrusted by the project through
the appropriate means to put the project's views into words.

But Peter wasn't claiming that his views were the project's by any means
-- he simply stated them in a way that, in my opinion, is easily mistaken
for a statement of a pre-existing consensus on behalf of the project. 

There is no such consensus, however -- if there were, there would have
been no one to raise this GR in the first place -- and this process
of discussion and voting is how the project forms its opinion on the
subject, which may well end up being entirely different to Peter's
opinion, or yours, or mine.

> Well. do we chip hardare, and as thus have the content of their ROMs covered
> by the DFSG ? 

We choose to apply the DFSG both to the components that the Debian system
requires, and to what we use to provide debian.org services. It can be
reasonably argued that non-free firmware encoded in ROMs is involved in
both cases.

I'm reluctant to argue for or against either of those, since I don't
know what the project's view on these things is or will be, and I don't
want anyone to be confused into thinking that my personal view on this
is the project's.

I'm entirely comfortable in saying that it's an issue worth discussing
though, because that's both my personal view and, in my opinion, the
project's view.

> I am not aware of such a situation, and altough Peter may have
> not said it in the best way, remember that for all those non-native english
> speakers there is a language barrier there, [...]

TTBOMK, and according to whois, Peter is US based, and a native speaker...


[0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/04/msg00015.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: