On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 03:06:49PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Anthony Towns [Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:45:19 +1000]: > > What documents would this effort actually let us keep, anyway? All the > > FSF stuff for glibc, gcc, make and so on includes invariant sections > > anyway, no? > Right, FSF stuff goes away. OTOH, I feel utterly ashamed each time I > imagine the possibility of the following conversation taking place: > «Hey, fellow free software developer, [...] No unmodifiable sections you > say? Bah, you know we in Debian care more about legalese than about > being fair to the rest of the community. [...] » I don't think there are many people left in the free software community who don't already know that Debian cares more about legalese than many, so you can probably avoid explaining that... :) I'm not incredibly comfortable having those conversations either, but they're easier if you say "well, these are our principles, and we'll stand up for them even when it sucks, much like now." and then go on to figure out decent alternatives that can work around the problems -- like making the documentation accessible from non-free. Did you try mailing Eben Moglin or RMS or anyone about the correct interpretation of the "transparent" section? Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature