Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:38:41PM -0700, Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:41:22PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > Si, am I silly and alone in thinking that firmware is binary
> > > > computer programs? Let us ask google to define: firmware:
> > > You are silly in pretending that the DFSG and the widely shared
> > > consensus among developers always intended considering them non-free
> > > and inappropriate for main.
> > The last of the three pre-sarge non-free GRs confirmed the fact that firmware
> > is indeed a code binary, and should have source.
> No, it did not. Reread the GR that passed; it says nothing about firmware
> or source code.
But it explicitely replaced all occurences of "program" by "work" in the
It is a strange the DFSG itself didn't get the same change in the same GR...