Le Lundi 8 Avril 2002 05:08, David Starner a écrit : > On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be > > > not? > > > > No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely > > considered free by our community are using this license. Thus, the > > onus is on you to put forth a real argument for why it's not free. > > Um, it fails section 3 (Modifications permitted) of the DFSG? A > strictly literal reading of the DFSG clearly prohibits Invariant > Sections. Any body claiming that the FDL (with Invariant Sections) is > free is basically proposing a change in the DFSG, or at least the > readings or scope thereof. I'd say the onus is on the people who want > to change the status quo.
DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines". Aurelien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
