Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Zephaniah E. Hull
Seconded. On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 06:26:27AM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > Hello, > > After my amendment to the GFDL GR was accepted, there was a bit of > discussion about the majority requirement that should be put on it. In > a nutshell, this is what happened: > > - in what may have

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
Adeodato Simó wrote: > Debian and the GNU Free Documentation License > = > > This is the position of the Debian Project about the GNU Free Documentation > License as published by the Free Software Foundation: > > 1. We consider that the GNU Free Docum

Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract

2006-02-09 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Feb 09, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Moreover, while I think a majority of the developers are surely > honorable, this is not true of everyone. Now that this is the *third* > time we are being asked to vote on essentially the same question, I > suspect that many of the prop

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread martin f krafft
seconded (again). also sprach Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.02.09.0626 +0100]: > Hello, > > After my amendment to the GFDL GR was accepted, there was a bit of > discussion about the majority requirement that should be put on it. In > a nutshell, this is what happened: > > - i

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 06:26:27AM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: >---8<--- > >Debian and the GNU Free Documentation License >= > >This is the position of the Debian Project about the GNU Free D

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Isaac Clerencia
I second the Amendment fully quoted below. On Thursday 09 February 2006 06:26, Adeodato Simó wrote: > Hello, > > After my amendment to the GFDL GR was accepted, there was a bit of > discussion about the majority requirement that should be put on it. In > a nutshell, this is what happened: >

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 06:26:27AM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote: > So here's a revised version of the original amendment, which Manoj has > ACK'ed, and for which I expect to receive soon the necessary ACKs from > my original seconders (CC'ed) so that it can replace the previous one. As per A.

Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract

2006-02-09 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 01:30:45AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Nick Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In fact, Adeodato's amendment is clear in its explanation that "we > > believe that the GFDL does meet the spirit of the DFSG (so long as you > > have no invariant sections)". [...] > Th

Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2

2006-02-09 Thread Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt
Heya, I second the Amendment fully quoted below. Marc > Debian and the GNU Free Documentation License > = > > This is the position of the Debian Project about the GNU Free Documentation > License as published by the Free Software Foundation: > > 1. W

<    1   2