On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:38:21 +1100 Matthew Palmer wrote: > I'm too tired to dig up the exact reference, but in a large heated > discussion between Hans Reiser and many other people on d-devel last > year(or maybe the year before) about removing or obscuring credits in > mkreiserfs, Hans Reiser stated that he had information from RMS that > there would be some sort of "invariant section"-like clause in GPLv3.
IIUC which discussion you are referring to, it was in April-May 2004.
I tried to find the exact message in which Hans told us those "rumors",
but I miserably failed... :-(
Anyway I recall something similar.
>
> Earlier than that, in a thread here on d-legal regarding the GFDL, RMS
> himself made a few sideways comments regarding the content of the
> GPLv3.
>
> More generally, the direction that the FSF appears to have been moving
> in the last few years has, in some peoples' eyes, been diverging
> somewhat from the "Debianistic" view of freedom.
Indeed.
And that is really a pain, considering the influence that the FSF
has (and deserves) among the free software community.
--
Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpsrAQzV3WwJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
