On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:22:33AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: > I'm on the mailing list, there's no need to CC me. > > John Goerzen writes: > > And yet every proposal you put forth is "Debian must become more like OSI > > and the DFSG must become more like OSD." > > ... and the OSD must become more like the DFSG, and proposed open > source licenses should be run past debian-legal. I'm not proposing > unilateral action on anybody's part. I'm prepared to compromise (or > rather, to recommend compromise to my board of directors). Are you?
I am NOT prepared to compromise Debian's high Free Software standards. I am NOT prepared to accept RPSL-licensed software into Debian. In this case, "compromise" seems to me merely a word for "cave-in". I have no prima facie opposition to clarifying points of the DFSG based on important case history from debian-legal; however, I would rather see this as a "DFSG companion" rather than an amendment to the DFSG itself. > > I for one am glad that RPSL-licensed software is not in Debian, and > > Why? The sole objections that I can see from debian-legal archives > refer to text which has been changed in the final OSI-approved license. My objections referred to the text as posted on your website under the approved section as of... about two days ago. -- John
