On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:46:23 +0200, Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 04:44:59PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> This is a procedural nightmare. What happens if we do split things
>> and Anton's proposal asses, we issue a statement, and the DFSG
>> amendment fails? We'll have a contradiction between a position
>> statement and the DFSG, which is bad.
> This would mean that Debian developers decided that DFSG do not
> require clarification.
> Notice BTW, that the interpretation of DFSG that I proposed is not
> the only one possible interpretation of DFSG that makes my proposal
> about GFDL consistent with DFSG.
I would think not clarifying the DFSG would make for a
contradiction. At the very least, it would confuse a large set of
readers. I still think these decsions are on a related topic that
belong on one ballot.
manoj
--
Proclaim liberty throughout the land until all the inhabitants
thereof. Leviticus 25:10
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
