[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: planet.debian.org is RC buggy (?)

Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> I consider blogs as non-free, proprietary material (a very few have a
> proper license, the "distribution" media s*cks anyway).

I didn't notice a license on your email either. But every time I recall
licenses of email being discussed, the conclusion has been that it
doesn't sufficiently matter, that the implied redistribution and quoting
grant is good enough and being more picky about licensing would be
counterproductive to good communication.

If one cared about licenses of blog posts, one could configure
planet.debian.org to use the license data from the feeds it aggregates,
perhaps prominently displaying it at the bottom of a post. For an
example of a planet that does this, see http://updo.debian.net/ (you'll
find (non-free!) licenses on at least the posts from RMS ;) If this were
done on planet.debian.org, I expect it might influence some posters to
put a license on their blogs. It might be fairly easy to get things to
the point that there is social pressure for bloggers on planet debian to
do so.

> Breaks DFSG #1
> Breaks DFSG #3

Given how often we need to contact upstreams to clarify/fix license
issues, I imagine most of us would not be bothered to need to contact
someone in the same project. Just as we would if they had posted it
to a mailing list, or to wiki.debian.org.

> Breaks DFSG #2: No source for stuffs like charts and graphs (HTML is a
> valid source here). Is this a problem?

If you're interested in making it easier to access the source to web
sites in a automatable fashion, check out this proto-RFC:

> Replying to a blog entry is very difficult. The replies and the original
> posted aren't available side-by-side. The comments aren't available on
> Debian planet (a kind of censorship). Actually, some blog even forbid
> comments! Is this a problem?

It suggests to some of us that it only makes sense to use comments for
essentially throwaway speech, that we don't mind being under the control
of the blog owner; and that anything substantial should instead be
posted to our own blogs.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: