On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:38:51PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 05:41:26 -0500 David Turner wrote: > > > > > In this regard, I asked what is the preferred way to send concerns > > > > about the GFDL in general. [EMAIL PROTECTED] would be glad to > > > > receive comments and use them for work on GFDL revision 3. > > > > > > Most of these comments have been made for over 5 years now! > > > I have been told that there is a new draft of the FDL ready > > > for publication. Please publish it, so we can comment topically. > > > > We're not prepared to release a new draft of the FDL in the middle of > > the GPLv3 process. There are a few reasons for this: > > > > 1. We have limited staff resources. > > > > 2. Some text from the GPL may be carried over into the FDL. > > So, let me understand: > > * you admit that a new GFDL version is necessary to address its issues > > * there are not enough resources to start a public comment process > right now > > * there are enough resources to push the adoption of a *bad* license > with known issues, before it gets fixed > > This puzzles me. > Wouldn't it be wiser to fix the license *first* and only *then* ask for > compatibility?
Better ask early, and it depends on whether the known issues of a license outweight the issues of other solutions, or not. -- Sylvain
