Glenn Maynard writes: > I guess you want CC's. If you won't add an MFT header, at least say you > want them; Debian list policy is to not CC people on replies unless > requested, and some of us do follow this policy. :)
Debian list policy is to not CC people on replies unless requested. > I do think that, for specific interpretations of existing DFSG clauses, > having them in a secondary document is better than amending the > (currently short and to-the-point) DFSG. Irony is in fact NOT dead, no matter what anyone may say about it. You see, to determine if something is "DFSG-free", you cannot simply read the DFSG. With this fact in mind, and with a straight face, can you reiterate your assertion that the DFSG is "to-the-point"? It seems more accurate to say that the DFSG is besides the point. -- -russ nelson http://russnelson.com | You get prosperity when Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | the government does less, 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | not when the government Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | does something right.
