[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: To doc or not to doc, that's the question. (long RFC)

>   2. We'd have to define some policy to tell where a doc package goes. If
> "emacs" is in main, I'd like to have emacs-doc there too. But the
> `bible-kjv' package, for example, could be moved to the new distrib.

Another thing that might be nice about having a separate doc-only
distribution is that it could have looser restrictions on copyrights.

This is much documentation out there that is freely redistributable,
but not freely modifiable.  For certain types of documentation
(opinion pieces, articles, etc.), I don't have a problem with this sort 
of arrangement.  

Many writings, for the most part, are different from software because 
they are relatively static, one-person creations -- and people don't build
systems out of them.  The DFSG keeps a lot of really good freely distributable
documentation out of the main distribution.  I don't have a problem with
that, since the main distribution is primarily software.  But a side
distribution of documentation would be more successful with looser

Ever notice that RMS copylefts his software, but copyrights his writings
and opinions?


 - Jim

Attachment: pgpquLUI7v9Yi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: