Re: Anton's amendment
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:24:36AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> The FSF insists that only modification of "functional" parts is
> important, and this is a key in the disagreement. We insist on the
> modifiability of all parts, not only in the parts which someone says
> are the important parts to be able to modify.
The decision we have taken is that DFSG applies to all works, not just
to software programs. We have never taken decision acording to which
"we insist on the modifiability of all parts". I'd say that we insist
on the modifiability of some particular part only if this is necessary
in order to solve some practical task, for example to extend or change
the functionality of the work.
> Regardless of the particular reasons--and even if there are not any
> good reasons--it is the case that this is the DFSG as written, and so
> I agree with Manoj that a 3:1 requirement is necessary for the
> proposed amendment.
The 3:1 requirement would be necessary only if you can prove that "we
insist on modifiability of all parts".
Anton Zinoviev
Reply to: