Re: Can the FSF be corrupted
Mathieu Roy <email@example.com> writes:
> There no contradiction with the Invariant part option: no invariant
> part can describe a particular function.
> You can provide an accurate documentation without changing a text
> written by the original author that explain why he started to write
> the software.
No, you can't. For example, if I take a section of S-Expr parsing
code from Emacs and put it into my own program, I might want to take a
section out of the Elisp manual which discusses this topic. I'd have
to take along the GNU Manifesto and "Why Free Software needs Free
Documentation" as well, and any Invariant added by any distributer
between me and the original author. That's not reasonable.
Also, it illustrates an excessively simplistic view of why one might
modify a manual: it might not just be to cover new functionality in
the program for which the manual is written; it might be for a new
program, or an excerpt, or a historical essay on free documentation.
That freedom to modify *for any purpose*, not just the purpose of the
original author, is necessary.