>>>>> "Jérôme" == Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jérôme> But we absolutely don't want to do this.
Jérôme> It is just like modifying someone else' speach and
Jérôme> redistributing it without changing the author's name.
Jérôme> It is obvious it should be out of the scope of DFSG.
It is far from obvious. What if I develop my software, finds the
specification of MIME to be very similar to what my software does, but yet I
need to modify the things here and there so as to suit my needs; and when
documenting my software I want to use RFC 1341 as a starting point, change
those things that my software do differently than 1341, and then say that is
the documentation of my software? I have no intention to confuse the result
with RFC 1341, so what's wrong to do the edit (except that the author of RFC
1341 might be unhappy with that)? To the user it is really best done that
way: if I have to rewrite 1341 I probably won't give documentation at all
because I don't have the time. If instead I just point out the positions
that my software differs from 1341 the user would have to read two different
documents.
I'd accept it if the restriction is just saying that I cannot distribute a
modifying RFC without changing the name to something else. I cannot accept
it if the license restricts my right to change it at all (other than for
translation or development of new standards)---at least, if it were to be
put in main section of Debian. It sounds like a trap waiting for somebody
to step into it.
Regards,
Isaac.
