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

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement



On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 13:30:32 -0800, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> said: 

> Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:
>> I'm confused. Where does it say that we have to go through the GR
>> process to issue a position statement for something the project has
>> already decided on?

> How do we know the project has decided on it?

> Not a flippant question.  That's felt like it's been missing from
> these discussions, and certainly RMS has, in the past, questioned
> whether the project has really decided on it.  debian-legal is not a
> decision-making body.  I agree with your take on the consensus, but
> I know other people certainly have not.

> I suppose the DPL delegate who could speak officially for the
> project here would be the ftpmasters; is there an official statement
> about this?  I believe the release team has decided that GFDL
> inclusion in main is RC for the etch release, but I'm not sure where
> I could find that statement either.  I suppose that might be
> sufficient.

        The release team has spoken, and they decide what goes in a
 release.  If they have decided, under advice from debian-legal, that
 GFDL docs are RC bugs, then that is that.

        Personally, I doubt that there is any doubt that the GFDL
 does not satisfy the DFSG.

        manoj
-- 
"Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" -Ronald Reagan
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: