General Resolution: GFDL Position Statement

[ 1 ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases
[ 3 ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free
[   ] Choice 3: GFDL-licensed works are compatible with the DFSG [needs 3:1]
[ 4 ] Choice 4: Further discussion

Despite the creative interpretations of the GFDL and the DFSG that some have offered, I still do not believe that the GFDL meets the requirements for inclusion in Debian main. Not the letter, and certainly not the spirit.

Documents that do not contain invariant sections are much less problematic, but the implications of the DRM-clause are still an issue, (regardless of whether it is a bug in the wording or not). Nevertheless, I did rank Adeodato’s amendment just above “Further discussion” in the interest of compromise.


comments powered by Disqus