Barak Pearlmutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > free license, Debian in general does not consider material under the >> > GFDL to be free. > >> I think it's premature to include such a statement in an official > > Good point. > > Can you suggest a re-phrase for the GFDL question? > > I think it is fair to say that Debian strongly discourages its use, ie > there does seem to be consensus on that.
"Debian strongly discourages its use. However, there is an ongoing discussion whether software documentation in Debian has to meet the DFSG, or some different standards specific to documentation. Even if Debian literally applied its free software guidelines to documentation, some choices in the range of license terms offered by the GFDL could still meet Debian's standards, although this subject to debate as well. The way the GFDL is applied to a lot of GNU software documentation and some other source is not compatible with the DFSG, so if the DFSG do apply to documentation, Debian would have to remove such documentation from its distribution." (Modulo some smoothing by a native speaker, as usual. And you might want to drop the reference to GNU software documentation.)
