Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 05:56:55PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: >> I also think that this would be good to try and add to the DFSG. I >> think it would make a position we've tacidly had here on -legal much >> more clear than it is now. > >I think it derives directly from DFSG#1--certainly the spirit, even if >the letter is debated. I think adding new guidelines that are subsets >of existing ones would set a very bad precedent, since it implies that >the DFSG is to be read literally, as a set of rules, instead of a set of >guidelines.
I see no way that forced distribution of code to upstream is a subject that springs directly from DFSG 1. If you disagree, then I'd suggest that DFSG 1 is modified in order to make it clearer. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
