Re: Anton's amendment
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 09:31:07AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > restricting modifications to original + patch only is explicitly
> > permitted.
>
> But one is supposed to be able to distribute the patched
> derived work.
yes, and you can. maybe not in the most convenient form that you would
prefer, but that's irrelevent - DFSG requires freedom, not convenience.
> In this case, I should be able to have the orig.tar.gz contain the
> invariant, the diff.gz contain stuff to remove the invariant, and the
> .deb not contain it.
>
> That seems not permitted.
of course not, any more than it is permitted to remove the license text
or the copyright notice(*).
as has been said SEVERAL times before, the "patch" to an invariant section
does NOT change or remove it. it just adds another invariant section in
response to it. you may not claim credit for the work of others OR put your
words in their mouths. these are both reasonable and entirely unremarkable
restrictions which do not in any way impinge on freedom.
(*) yes, i know the loony nutcases like to pretend that they're entirely
different magically special cases which can be ignored for the purposes
of the DFSG (mostly because even they realise they can't completely
ignore their existence without losing what few shreds of credibility
they have), but they're seriously reality-challenged.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
Reply to: