Why this route?
Posted Sep 23, 2006 2:33 UTC (Sat) by coriordan
In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
Have you submitted these comments through gplv3.fsf.org ? If not, why not?
(Keeping in mind that the issues reported there seem to be being listened to)
One important design feature of the gplv3.fsf.org comment portal is that it requires people to highlight what words and sentences their comments relate to. In public discussions, people can say "I/We don't like the patent bits", but at the portal, you have to say what words you disagree with. The downside is that commenters have to have actually read the draft, and they actually have to have a possibly-valid comment. It sounds like you have read the draft, so this isn't a problem in this case. The upside is that discussion starts from fact and details instead of general ideas.
One example is the length. For 15 years, people said "make it shorter", but when it is opened for revision, how many pointed out words that could be removed? Few or none.
Please, do submit your comments through gplv3.fsf.org, not just slashdot and lwn.net
to post comments)