Understanding the GFDL GR proposal and amendment
At the time of writing, I've not seen these two answered:
Fabian Fagerholm <fabbe@debian.org>
> Has Debian explicitly adopted the view that GFDL is completely
> non-DFSG-free regardless of its mode of use? If so, which GR(s) has
> (have) established this?
I think so. Amongst others, see
http://release.debian.org/removing-non-free-documentation sent as
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/09/msg00007.html
No GR is required for a delegated decision (Constitution s8.3,
although I can't remember the release team's delegated powers and
I didn't find it on the web site).
The decision can be reversed in some ways by a GR (s4.1.3), which
is what I think the amendment is trying to do, in addition
to issuing a confused position statement (s4.1.5).
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: