Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 11:39:23PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > Let us try to avoid generic discussions that are not related to star.
>
> > Show me the exact art of the DSFG that you believe is incompatible with
> > the CDDL and explain why exactly you believe that this part of the DSFG
> > is incompatible with the CDDL.
>
> > As it seems that most people do not know the text, here are the links:
>
> > The CDDL has been approved to be compatible with this:
>
> > http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
>
> > The DSFG is here:
>
> > http://www.us.debian.org/social_contract
>
> > If you compare the both texts, you will find that the CDDL has been
> > verified against a text that is gradually more strict than the DSFG.
>
> > Note that in case Debian tries to enforce rules that are not written down
> > properly, it looks as if Debian is acting with arbitrariness.
>
> Debian is applying human judgement when interpreting a set of guidelines.
> Only the OSI has ever claimed that the DFSG are a suitable set of rules that
> can be applied literally and mechanically to licenses to determine their
> freeness; Debian never has.
I am sure you have no authority on Debian and I hope that you are not speaking
for the majority in Debian.
You still did not answer my question:
Show me the exact part of the DSFG that you believe is incompatible
with
the CDDL and explain why exactly you believe that this part of the DSFG
is incompatible with the CDDL.
And a hint: if Debian really does not follow the Debien DFSG on
http://www.us.debian.org/social_contrac but rather follows your arbitrariness,
Debian would obviously be anti-social and not trustworthy.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
