[Pkg-doc-linux-devel] Re: Problems with WWW-HOWTO

[G Ferguson / LDP]

---------- Original Message -------------
Subject: Re: Problems with WWW-HOWTO
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:54:03 -0600
From: doug jensen <djen@ispwest.com>
To: G Ferguson / LDP <ldp@fergusontechgroup.com>


[Note:  The following relates to an email posted to discuss@tldp.org, I
am assuming that Frank and Colin are still subscribed to that list.]

On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 01:18:40PM -0000, G Ferguson / LDP wrote:
> 
>>>  Can the current WWW-HOWTO be removed?  Hopefully reverting to a version
>>> similar to http://hrast.pef.uni-lj.si/docs/en/www_howto/WWW-HOWTO.html.
>>>
>>>It should be noted that Mr. Poet is apparently the same person
>>> responsible for the Net-HOWTO which was recently reverted.
>> 
>> I'd rather not make a habit of this removal. If someone is stepping up to
>> take over the document, I'd be more inclined to roll-back to a previous
>> version (as I know that a new document will be produced).  
> ..
> Greg, since your reply was sent only to me and not the discuss list, I
> assume you would rather not have a discussion on that list.  However,
> since my motivation is with the Debian project I feel a need to keep
> them informed.  The list that I have Cc'ed, pkg-doc-linux-devel, only
> has two other subscribers that I know of; Frank Lichtenheld and Colin
> Watson (maintainer and former maintainer/now co-maintainer, respectively,
> of the Debian package that includes LDP HOWTOs).  Frank and Colin have
> both demonstrated a sense of professionalism that goes well beyond my
> own, so I don't think that should be a problem.  However, the list is
> archived, anyone can read it or send email without a subscription.  It
> seems unlikely that others would have an interest in the list.  

Sure, that's fine. I've worked with Colin in the past. You folks have been
most helpful.

> So, with all that as an introduction, the following is my reply to you.
>
> Thank you for your reply.  I respect your decision and understand your
> concern.
>
> Just to make sure that I understand your position, none of the following
> would be considered a legitimate reason to remove a document:
> To summarize the major problems (copied from prior email):
> 1.  No attribution to the author, Pramod Karnad.
> 2.  Removal of the Intranet-Server-HOWTO licensing.
> 3.  Coping of Intranet-Server-HOWTO without proper attribution.
> 4.  Introduction of a new license (an old version of LDP license).
> 5.  Mutiple licenses, without clearly stating how they are applied.
> 6.  Lack of proper maintenance.

So I will admit I purposely remove myself from most licensing
related issues. I would be the first to advocate the removal of the
document if there are glaring technical inaccuracies or if we had
a blantant mis-use of LDP resources (as in the Net-HOWTO,
which contained a "donate here" link on every page...of which
any sort of money went to the current maintainer who really did
not do much of anything to the document itself...short of adding
those links!).

In regards to #6, I would like to see a maintainer on board (hence,
my response). At that point I would feel more comfortable with
a roll-back.

Now, having said that, I must stress this is my *opinion* and one
not based on having examined the licensing issues. Usually
David Lawyer (and a few others) will respond to those situations.

Based on collective feedback, I'm willing to perform the roll-back
if it's determined to be the proper course of action. Certainly violating
licensing issues could prompt this; it sounds like you've done your
homework tracking down that part.

So my decision is not final by any means! 

> Greg, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all the
> work that you do, alot that is not always seen by others.  So thank you
> and I do respect you decision, even if I disagree in this case.

Thanks Doug.  I'll watch the list for further discussion and then
we'll see what action we need to take. I appreciate your efforts.

best regards
-- 
Greg Ferguson / LDP volunteer
ldp@fergusontechgroup.com