My concerns about GPLv3 process

Werner Koch wk at
Tue Jan 31 07:37:10 UTC 2006

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:40:51 +0000, MJ Ray said:

> I think *updating* the FDL is more important than updating the GPLs.

I concur.  The GFDL is suffering from a lot of practical problems and
even didn't achieved its goal to foster publishing of free
documentation as woodware.  Even worse, GNU maintainers have been
forced to change all documentation to the GFDL and only a few resisted
and kept foing with the GPL. 

We now have the so-called printer friendly GFDL and not to long ago
the FSF gave up on GNU press and laid off the responsible editor. GFDL
a success?

> As far as we know, we have working GPLs, but we have a FDL which

There are actually a couple of mid-term problems which should be
solved by a new GPL but the whole process thing is too much of big
business and too less of modern communication.  Its like the old FSF
closed shop development model.

> I agree that it compromises on openness. Who are secret juntas
> A-E and will their proceedings be public?

I'd like to know this too.  The only detail I know is that minutes
From the commitee meetings will be published.  A bit of glasnost would
do good.



Werner Koch                                      <wk at>
The GnuPG Experts                      
Free Software Foundation Europe        
Join the Fellowship and protect your Freedom!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 200 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list