On Vi, 08 iun 12, 10:58:48, Hiroki Horiuchi wrote: > > After reading your words, now I think The Free Software Definition is > really permissive, but this very *permissiveness* made GNU's definition > insufficient for Debian Project.
Not in my opinion. Take the example of the GFDL: a document with invariant sections does not have freedom 3. AFAIR the FSF's stance is that documentation is not software. Debian's stance is that a truly free software also has free documentation[1] and the GPL can and should be used for that as well (or at least not use the restrictive options of the GFDL)[2][3] [1] a complex software for which the only documentation is the source code is not very useful and there is no reason why the same liberties should not apply to documentation [2] for an entity that preaches non-proliferation of licenses FSF has created quite a few... [3] before anyone here wants to argue that the GPL is meant for software only they should read it[4] [4] ... and reply to -offtopic, see my sig Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
