On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Darren Benham wrote: > > It *is* possible to have these issues addressed in another document. > > Maybe, one that describes the conditions for all files that get to > > go into main. For software, it can point to the DFSG, for other > > files, it can handle as is fitting (and we don't know what that is, > > yet)...
Personally, I don't believe there is such a thing as non-software files. Software refers to the mutability of the media, not the contents. The distinction between code and data is contextual. However, I agree that -- at least in principle -- we could have multiple documents describing freedoms we require to be associated with different kinds of files. Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > True. That is a sensible option. > > However, the DFSG then needs to clearly indicate what its domain is, > of cours. Then again, changing the DFSG to make these distinctions clear, without also supplying something to fill in the holes, is a big step backwards. -- Raul
