  Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge  On Tue, Apr 27, 2004
at 10:15:21AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > >> However, I still
think that it was only editorial changes, that the > >>
considered non-critical for sarge despite of this.  > I never
said you or anybody "willfully violate the social > contract".
No, you didn't. What you did say wasn't really relevant though
-- the DFSG didn't change, so it's trivially true that
everything that was non-free before the GR is also non-free
after.  The relevant question is whether distributing anything
violated the social contract after the GR that didn't before --
since the SC was the only thing that changed, its application to
actions is the only thing that could change.  You're claiming
that the stuff didn't change, and that "it was considered non-
critical for sarge despite of this". That's not the case -- it
was considered non-critical because this was considered to *not
be the case*. Add "by me" to both clauses, if you like. That
you're claiming the opposite re