Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 13:12, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > [message BCCed to aj] > > > > > > > > I wanted you all to be aware how Sarge is treating Documentation and the > > > > DFSG: <http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt> > > > > > > > > Documentation in main and contrib must be freely distributable, > > > > and wherever possible should be under a DFSG-free license. This > > > > will likely become a requirement post-sarge. > > > > > > Why can't the offending packages just be moved to non-free? It isn't > > > like there hasn't been enough warning. > > > > I would guess that's because we haven't committed to a decision yet. > > :-( > > I believe this comment is a mischaracterisation of the consensus that > has developed on this list. Recently explained by Nathanael Nerode on > the glibc mailing list: > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2003/debian-glibc-200308/msg00160.html> > > I in no way support any claims that clear majority agreement has not > been reached. So in this respect sarge_rc_policy.txt should at least > read: "This will become a requirement post-sarge."
That post says: The people left who claim that we should allow GFDLed documents with invariant sections into 'main' are... I would hope that the other problems with this license will be sufficient to make it non-free even for dovs without ainvariant sections. Do we have a consensus on that? In the meantime, if there's consnsus about invariant sections then I don't see why they cn't be moved to non-free before november. > > > > Given the aggressive (and endearingly optimistic) timetable of releasing > > > > Sarge this December[0!] I support this pragmatic decision. > > > > > > Pragmatism is not the defining principle of the DFSG. > > > > With you 100%. > > It's a timing issue. Clear consensus has only occurred very recently. Do > people want to see FTP uploads being rejected right this minute? The > forthcoming release of Sarge gives everyone a clear and historical cut > off date for implementing the consensus and gives archive maintainers a > clear date for strictly enforcing policy. I'd rather we stick to our principles, but clearly there isn't a consensus on that. Peter
