Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Does everybody on that list, that thinks that GNU > political/historical/philosophical/ texts must be DSFG compliant to be > distributed by Debian, also thinks that the Debian logos must be DFSG > compliant?
No. I think it's much easier for Debian to make an exception for Debian's logo than for documentation produced by other organisations, be they the FSF or O'Reilly. > So the next step seems obvious to me, Debian have make a choice: > - follow the strict definition of DFSG promoted by many > persons on that list and move the Official Debian Logo to > non-free. > - think about an another policy for logos or > political/philosophical/historical texts. One could do that, but it wouldn't help because the FSF documentation under discussion is neither a logo nor in the category of "political/philosophical/historical texts". Are we going round in circles here?
