On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 11:30:47PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I believe Debian should have a standard a priori the GNU Emacs Manual > > (for example), and not reason backwards on the assumption that > > everything that is in main must belong there.
> I can't parse the first sentence here; perhaps that's the problem. > Can you reword it? Debian should develop an interpretive standard for the DFSG based on premises that do *not* include: "The GNU Emacs Manual must be in main come hell or high water." More generally, Debian's interpretive standard should not regard any particular package which happens to be in main at present as somehow "deserving" of being there. Not the Linux kernel, not the GNU C Library, not <insert your favorite shell/editor/terminal emulator here>. What legitimizes a work under the DFSG is the license as applied to that work. Period. Should we look before we leap, and not interpret the DFSG in such a way that would decimate main? Absolutely. I believe I have done so with respect to my own proposal, and while I would not be happy to see the GNU Emacs Manual rendered non-free (which is by no means a certainty, let's keep in mind), it's not a deal-breaker for me. Your mileage may vary. Some people regard all things GNU with a sort of religious reverence. I personally just try to accord the FSF the respect I think it has earned. That doesn't mean I think Debian should subordinate its own standards or needs to the FSF's desires. But, my proposal isn't about the FSF. It's about DFSG 3 and 4, and how we apply them. -- G. Branden Robinson | There is no housing shortage in Debian GNU/Linux | Lincoln today -- just a rumor that [EMAIL PROTECTED] | is put about by people who have http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | nowhere to live. -- G. L. Murfin
pgpnPbevdy5iU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
