Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Debian was mostly unaware of the existence of these invariant >> sections, and the problem had not been greatly discussed. > > Do you mean people never read licenses before?
I do not know of any evidence that people were aware of the invariant section requirements on the FSF manuals. People may have read them and not given them much thought, or indeed, simply not even read them carefully at all. I don't know. For this reason, my words are "mostly unaware". >> I was aware of it, but at the time I still believed that the GFDL >> passed the DFSG. > > Prior to GFDL inception, you did not speak up about those invariant > section, didn't you? No, because I thought that they (and the GFDL) passed the DFSG. Why would I "speak up" about a license that, at the time, I thought passed the DFSG? I changed my mind after I was convinced by the arguments of other people. You know, listening to them seriously, evaluating what they say, and so forth, rather than just declaring them idiots, calling them fundamentalists, and complaining about voting procedures. Thomas
