On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:57:43PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Here's what I have in mind: > > > >http://people.debian.org/~asuffield/licenses/cddl/summary.html > > I especially liked the way you determine which arguments are correct > and which ones "standard responses"...
The word 'correct' does not appear. A point is considered valid if it has no valid rebuttals. This is an elementary principle of debate. I determine whether a point is a standard response by this very simple metric: If I personally am aware of this point occurring in the context of two or more distinct licenses, it's a standard response. This is a reflection of the way the code is organised; they're symlinks from within the cddl/ tree at the top level to the standard/ tree. It handles points being repeated in multiple discussions, without having to drag us through all the same stuff every time. An alternative name, instead of 'standard', is 'the anti-Marco-d'Itri feature', but I discarded this as being too hard to type. It defeats people who try to win arguments or simply sabotage debian-legal by repeatedly raising the same points in different contexts and hoping that other people get too tired to keep on smacking them down. Anything that shows up as a duplicate later will also get moved into standard/. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
