Re: The invariant sections are not forbidden by DFSG
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 12:37:00PM +0000, Stephen Gran <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Mike Hommey said:
> > On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 06:17:19PM +1100, Craig Sanders <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 04:42:41PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > > Craig Sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > alternatively, print a single link to either the full documentation
> > > > > (containing the invariant sections) or to just the invariant sections.
> > > >
> > > > This might be a reasonable thing, but it is not what the GFDL requires.
> > >
> > > actually, it is. the GFDL explicitly says that you can provide a link to
> > > an internet site - and, contrary to loony zealot propaganda, it does not
> > > say that you must operate or maintain that site yourself.
> > You forgot something...
> > > If you publish or distribute Opaque copies of the Document
> > > numbering more than 100, you must either include a machine-readable
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Er, that just means if you distribute 100 copies, you need provide
> neither a transparent copy or a link.
Which means the link thing Craig is talking about doesn't apply for