> From: Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This problem is unfortunate, but no worse in the case of two ways of > using the GFDL than with a pair of two different free software > licenses.
True, but this kind of problem never bites people who just use the GPL, while it seems to be biting people who "just use" the GFDL with alarming frequency. I would note that *even the FSF* has had trouble using the GFDL properly so as to avoid this problem. And even the FSF will be bitten by it again, should someone add some text to the GDB manual which the FSF incorporates back into its master copy, and then the FSF decides to modify the that document's invariant parts. The GFDL with any kind of invariant thing activated seems to largely break the "commons" property. In effect, each document is an isolated island, with serious transfer of text between documents made quite difficult. (At least, unless the same entity is in a position to relicense them both. In which case even a completely proprietary license would allow sharing, so this isn't a counterexample.) Regardless of whether this is an issue of "freedom", it does seem to be a rather serious practical problem. > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) > > Let me point out that just as Debian doesn't get to demand that the > GFDL be changed, so also the FSF does not have a role in determining > the interpretation of Debian's standards. I must take exception to this. Debian does indeed listen to the FSF, take its needs seriously, and listen to its arguments with an open mind and more importantly with an open heart. We are on the same side, working for the same ends. Debian is distributing the FSF's GNU system (plus a bunch of free applications and a kernel), a fact which we insist on acknowledging in the very name of our distribution. We nurture a Debian GNU/Hurd, and our founding documents codify ideas taken from the FSF. All of us were moved and motivated by RMS's eloquent writings on the subject. Debian has very close relations with upstream GNU developers, and strives to work together to solve technical problems and to advance our mutual goals. The same spirit of mutual respect and cooperation has carried through to license issues, where we should continue to strive to listen to and understand each other, and to try to work out any problems so as to together continue to advance the cause of the free software movement. Our cooperation on past license issues (KDE/Qt comes to mind) has been successful. So we do, in fact, have a history of working together to address license issues, both those of freedom per-se and those (like the KDE/Qt issue, and Mozilla as well) of convenience and the health of the copyleft commons.
