Re: A possible GFDL compromise
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> All I want to say about the new issue is that a small fractional
> increase in size for a large collection of manuals is not a big deal.
> That's not enough to make a license non-free.
You have mistaken the objection. There is no reason to think it would
be a small fractional increase, especially since little parts of
manuals--single paragraphs even--are useful reusable bits just in the
way that single functions of Lisp are.
> Debian doesn't have a view on this; various Debian developers have
> variou views. I have been trying to convince Debian developers that
> the GFDL's methods are proper, but you're all entitled to form your
> own opinions and make your own decisions.
Um, Debian *does* have a view on this.
Reply to: