> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 08:26:33AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote: > > The Social Contract defines the distribution as being entirely free > > software. "copyrighted works distributable in digital form" don't > > belong in the distribution. > > I'm pretty sure that the social contract is not asking us to avoid > distribute copyrighted works distributable in digital form.
For anything not in the "distribution" (e.g. the web pages), I would agree. However, I _do_ think that the social contract is saying that anything in the "distribution" must be free software. > > > Under the new social contract, he believes this distinction is > > > disallowed, because our free software guidelines are declared to > > > be the standard for judgment for all works in the debian system. > > > > > > In other words, before the release of the new social contract, there was > > > ambiguity as to which definition of "software" was intended in the DFSG > > > -- the release manager picked the most typical definition, and this was > > > supported in his opinion by historical practice. > > > > It was disallowed by the old social contract. There was a clear > > consensus, and I'm not the only one saying that [1] [2] [3]. > > "It"? The distinction. Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
