Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I second this proposal with or without the 'as' in clause 2.
> My proposal to amend the Debian Social Contract follows. You can find > the text of the existing Debian Social Contract at <URL: > http://www.debian.org/social_contract > or on your Debian system in the > file /usr/share/doc/debian/social-contract.txt if you have the > doc-debian package installed. > > ***************************************************************** > "Social Contract" with the Free Software Community {+[PROPOSED DRAFT > FOR AMENDMENT; NOT OFFICIAL]+} > > 1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free [-Software-] > > We promise to [-keep the-] {+preserve your right to freely use, > modify, and distribute+} Debian [-GNU/Linux Distribution entirely > free software. As there are many definitions of free software, we-] > {+operating system distributions. We+} include the guidelines we use > to determine if [-software-] {+a work+} is "free" [-below.-] {+in > a document called the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Every work > contained in our distributions will satisfy those guidelines.+} > We will support our users who develop and run non-free software > on Debian, but we will never make the system depend on an item of > non-free software. > > 2. We Will Give Back to the Free Software Community > > When we write new components of the Debian system, we will license > them as [-free software.-] {+freely in a manner consistent with the > Debian Free Software Guidelines.+} We will make the best system > we can, so that free software {+and other works+} will be widely > distributed and used. We will [-feed back bug-fixes,-] {+communicate > bug fixes,+} improvements, user requests, etc. to the "upstream" > authors of software {+and other works+} included in our system. > > 3. We [-Won't-] {+Will Not+} Hide Problems > > We will keep our entire [-bug-report-] {+bug report+} database open > for public view at all times. Reports that users file [-on-line-] > {+online+} will [-immediately-] {+promptly+} become visible to > [-others.-] {+others without requiring manual approval. Project > discussions will be held in forums open to public participation > except where absolutely necessary. We are committed to transparency > and accountability in our decision-making processes.+} > > 4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software > > We will be guided by the needs of our users and the [-free-software-] > {+free software+} community. We will place their interests > first in our priorities. We will support the needs of our users > for operation in many different kinds of computing environment. > We [-won't-] {+will not+} object to commercial software that is > intended to run on Debian systems, and [-we'll-] {+we will+} allow > others to create value-added distributions containing both Debian > and commercial software, without any fee from us. [-To support-] > {+In furtherance of+} these goals, we will provide an integrated > system of [-high-quality, 100% free software,-] {+high-quality works > of software and other materials+} with no legal restrictions that > would prevent these [-kinds of use. > > 5. Programs That Don't Meet Our Free-Software Standards > > We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of programs > that don't conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We > have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our FTP archive for > this software. The software in these directories is not part of > the Debian system, although it has been configured for use with > Debian. We encourage CD manufacturers to read the licenses of > software packages in these directories and determine if they can > distribute that software on their CDs. Thus, although non-free > software isn't a part-] {+uses+} of [-Debian, we support its use, > and we provide infrastructure (such as-] our [-bug-tracking-] > {+operating+} system [-and mailing lists) for non-free software > packages.-] {+distributions.+} > ***************************************************************** > > [N.B.: wdiff produced possibly confusing output. If you look carefully, > you will see that clause 5 has been stricken entirely.] > > Some of my amendments are semantic; that is, they change the meaning of > the Social Contract, whereas others are editorial; that is, they change > the wording of the Social Contract in an effort to convey the intended > meaning (as I understand it) in a clearer way. > > Rationales for amendments: > > 1) I felt it was important and useful to elaborate upon some of the core > freedoms we mean when talking about "free software" (or free > documentation, free images, etc.): those are the freedoms to use, > modify, and/or distribute the work in question. > > 2) Debian has been, and is increasingly, more than just a GNU/Linux > distribution. We produce multiple operating systems, and it does not > stand to reason that our GNU/Linux distribution will be the only one > worthy of a stable release forever. I have thus generalized the > language to "Debian operating system distributions" instead of > "Debian GNU/Linux Distribution". > > 3) The DFSG is, in my opinion, a separate work from the Social Contract, > and has a different scope. I have tweaked the wording of SC #1 so > that people don't always expect to find the text of the DFSG "below". > I do not seek to stop us from distributing the documents together, > however, and this proposal has no bearing on such a decision. > > 4) This proposal expands the language of our committment to freedom > beyond just "software". This proposal does not call for a renaming > of the DFSG, however, nor for the creation of another document to > provide guidelines for "non-software" works. > > 5) "feed back bug-fixes" felt like an awkward construction to me. This > is an editorial, not a semantic, change. > > 6) I expanded the contractions "we'll" to "we will" and "won't" to "will > not"; another editorial change. > > 7) The GCIDE prefers "online" to "on-line", and so do I; this is an > editorial change. > > 8) We cannot literally commit to bug reports becoming publicly visible > "immediately". We can commit to "promptly", however, and explicitly > spell out what was left implicit in the origianl Social Contract: we > will not have a staff of gatekeepers deciding which bug reports get > to be seen by the public, as practically all commercial software > interests do. > > 9) I have expanded the premise of SC #3 to cover grounds other than just > the BTS and technical problems in our products. Back in 1998, a lot > of non-technical discussions took place on -private (such as the > discussion of the Social Contract itself), but Debian has evolved > away from that, and nowadays traffic on -private is far more > restricted. I propose amending SC #3 to reflect this evolution, and > our need for greater transparency in accountability so that our > Project works better not just for the sake of the Free Software > community, but for our own developers, who are far more numerous now > than they were in 1998. Our committment to the principles in my > proposed clause 3 will help us ensure that we scale to meet the > demands placed on us by our larger (and still increasing) size. > > 10) I propose "free software community" instead of "free-software > community"; an editorial change. The concept of "free software" has > gained currency over the past 5 years as the GNU/Linux has increased > its profile, and I think we can afford to refer to it as such in our > Social Contract without confusing too many people. > > 11) I changed "To support the goals" to "In furtherance of these goals"; > an editorial change that implies (to me, anyway) more forceful and > directed action. > > 12) In both clause 1 and clause 5, I have replaced the phrase "100% free > software" with other constructions that are, hopefully, less > ambiguous, especially to those who must translate the Social > Contract into other languages. (This is not a made-up problem; it > was brought to the attention of the debian-legal list earlier this > year.) > > 13) Clause 5 has been stricken entirely. *This amendment does NOT > mandate the removal of the non-free section from anything, > anywhere.* What it does do is withdraw our commitment to provide a > "non-free section" via a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) archive > specifically. This makes it possible for us to decide, in the near > or distant future, to stop distributing the non-free section without > violating our own Social Contract. > > I am seeking seconds and editorial amendments to this proposed General > Resolution. > > The full texts of the existing Social Contract as it stands, and as it > would appear if the above amendments were accepted, are MIME-attached. > (The draft also include a prominent notice of its unofficial status, > too, of course, so that no one is confused.) -- Peter Makholm | There are 10 kinds of people. Those who count in [EMAIL PROTECTED] | binary and those who don't http://hacking.dk |
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
