On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 01:45:40AM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote: > Hereby I am proposing an amendment to the GR about GFDL opened by > Anthony Towns [Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:02:04 +1000] (The proposal actually became formal on the 12th, and that's the one you're amending, fwiw) > GNU Free Documentation License protects the freedom, > it is compatible with Debian Free Software Guidelines > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Obviously, presuming this amendment achieves sufficient seconds, I don't accept it as an amendment to the original proposal, thus it should appear as a separate option on the ballot. If I'd been making that amendment, I'd've made the amended resolution be something like "The GFDL is DFSG-free." and given all the text as rationale. YMMV obviously :) > It is naive to think that in order to fulfil this requirement of DFSG Calling your fellow developers "naive" isn't terribly nice, you sell out... ;) > Consequently the license requires distribution of the transparent form > ALONG with each opaque copy but not IN OR WITH each opaque copy. I wish the folks who believe this would just ask for a clarification from RMS or Eben Moglen. It'd be a lot more convincing. Anyone? > It is a fact confirmed by Richard Stallman, author of GFDL, Cite, please. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature