Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware
Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> relevant part is this:
>> >> 4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device
>> >> firmware shall also not be considered a program.
>> I as non native speaker understand that as this: [...]
> Yeah, but then way not say it clearly, and say that we will make an DFSG
> exception for firmware, independently of them being programs or not.
I'm not sure if Steve really meant it the way I rephrased it, but I
think it is.
Of course there could be some more clear wording on this, right.
>> In fact, I'd love to see some better rationale for the quoted point
>> (#4) of the proposed amendment.
> I think the rationale behind it is : We want to keep the firmware in
> main, so we say they are not program.
This is the motive, but not the rationale why we (can) make such an
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4