discuss: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
Subject:
Re: Debian-free licenses was Re: modifiability of docs: final decision
From:
Rick Moen ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2005 17:53:14 -0000
Message-Id: <20050310175312.GJ27314@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.####
> That's not how I read Rick's email. I read it as saying (in my own words):
> Debian is a collective of people. The "webmaster" role can be performed
> by a number of people, but does not necessarily reflect an official
> policy as stated in the Debian rule book.
Well, moreover -- if we can get down to brass tacks for a moment -- the
page houses exactly this: summaries, one on a subpage for each covered
licence, of various allegedly DFSG-based objections to that licence,
that had been posted by members of the highly public,
unrestricted-membership "debian-legal" mailing list.
Now, it seems highly ludicrous to suggest that such summaries, by their
very nature, _could_ possibly constitute the official view of the Debian
Project -- even if God Above and the Heavenly Host Themselves were the
people who had shoveled those public posts into summaries and web-ified
them. But Doug is perfect welcome to explain why that is the case
nonetheless.
He just hasn't chosen to do so despite repeated requests, and prefers to
spend time calling me names and diverting attention from the actual
matter at issue. If I were you, I'd wonder why that is.
