On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 14:16:31 +0200 Solal <solal.rast...@me.com> wrote:
> > I see that you don't like the DFSG. But as already has been said: We > > are Debian and follow our own contract and not a contact of some other > > project/company. > > I think if you have problems with the DFSG you should propose changes > > to improve it instead of saying we should drop it and follow someone > > else. > > > > PS: Please don't top-post. > > > > Regards > > Sven > > I understand you do not want use a someone else's contract, but the FSDG > are an anagream of DFSG, so that's the same... No, I joke. > There are a lot of things to change in the DFSG, but why change the > DFSG, the better contract is created : that's the FSDG! I do not see any > problems for using it! That's your opinion. I (for example) wouldn't call the FSDG "better" than the DFSG. So the problem is that the people making Debian are just not the same as the ones from FSF. I guess the differences between FSDG and DFSG are there because the people here WANT them like that. Not everyone here has to agree that FSDG is better than the DFSG just because you do. Regards Sven
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
