Re: Anton's amendment
Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:44:58PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 11:13:05AM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
>> > Sure, it says it must permit modifications, but it doesn't way
>> > that it must permit ALL modifications. The way it reads,
>> > literally, could be interpreted as it must permit ALL
>> > modifcations, or as it must permit at least two modifications (so
>> > that "modifications" is plural).
>>
>> Are you seriously suggesting that a webserver which allows one to only
>> modify the name it advertizes and the path to the default configuration
>> file is Free?
>
> Nobody is suggesting that. The point is that DFSG allow many
> interpretations and the Debian developers have to decide which one is
> the correct one.
But you have not explained how your amendment is an interpretation
rather than a modification of the DFSG. You cannot simply write
something new, and say "and this is an interpretation of the DFSG!"
It must actually *be* an interpretation, whether correct or not.
Nothing in the DFSG suggests treating documentation and programs
differently, and it was recently changed (by 3:1 vote!) to explicitly
treat them the same.
Which means that any interpretation must account for this fact: that
whatever the rules are, they are the same for documentation and
programs.
Now, what is the interpretation you suggest?
Reply to: