Re: The debate on Invariant sections (long)
Jaime E . Villate <villate@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 02:33:19AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 09:21:13PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > I would point out that the FSF has rewritten its views as well. For
> > > example, I protested that the FSF's acceptance of invariant sections
> > > contradicted its own reasing in the "why free manuals are important"
> > > document; the result was that the FSF changed the document.
> >
> > Do you have the previous version of the document?
> >
> > I'd like to prepare a word diff of the old and new versions, and
> > preserve it for posterity.
>
> You can easily do that using the viewcvs interface to www.gnu.org
>
> http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/?cvsroot=www.gnu.org
>
> I've failed to find the document "why free manuals are important" that
> Thomas Bushnell refers. Can he point out in viewcvs the two versions
> where the alleged change of the document occurred and some prove of
> the correlation with his protest?
Well, that document is free-doc.html, so:
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/philosophy/free-doc.html?cvsroot=www.gnu.org
CVS begins Feb 13 2001. The first version is pretty much the same as
the first. Did this happens before 2001?
Reply to: