Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On the other hand, "kernel-image-2.6.8-2-386.deb by the Debian kernel > team, based on the Linux kernel by Linus Torvalds and others" seems to > be accurate credit, doesn't it?
It's an arguably accurate description, but strikes me as an arguably misleading credit. > [...] > > I agree with that advice. Some licensors have drunk CC deeply and will > > not move, so I suggest that CC-sco is a possible compromise route > > until a fixed CC 3.x is finally published. > > Please do not tell me that we must compromise our principles while > waiting for things to get magically fixed. Depends what principle. I do not suggest compromising on the DFSG, but I do suggest compromising over exactly which licence to use to as the basis for meeting the DFSG. > I'm already deeply disappointed by the Debian project for taking such > decision with GR-2006-001... :-((( I think it remains to be seen which decision the project took. The position statement issued was vague at best, contradictory at worst, and has caused ripples which I think will provoke another vote. Any fools who ranked Further Discussion insincerely low and produced a bad compromise will get what they least wanted: further discussion and more voting as some DDs to try to still this chaos produced by imposing order. http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/fdl#rankfdhigh -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
