Re: Question to all the candidates: please explain GR-2006-001
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:53:56AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 16 mars 2007 à 08:35 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > While there are other problems than the
> > invariant section, it was really the biggest problem and the others
> > will probably disappear with the next GFDL update AFAIK.
>
> That's good news to hear. I've not followed the GFDL affair recently,
> were new drafts published without the anti-DRM clause?
Not without them, but with a reworded version of this anti-DRM clause
that, at least, removes the concerns which I personally have with the
license. They've also done other changes which I applaud (e.g.,
they've changed the definition of "transparent format" to be more
generic, and to not require a Free Software editor for the format in
order to call a file format transparent, one of the major concerns I had
with that section).
They've also produced a draft "SFDL" ('S', for 'Simple') which removes
invariant sections, and which can be used as an upgrade for FDL-licensed
documents that do not have an invariant section.
The drafts are hosted on the GPLv3 site; see
<http://gplv3.fsf.org/doclic-dd1-guide.html/> for links to both drafts.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
Reply to: