Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:05:45AM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:54:40PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I don't know. Call me an optimist, but I seem to be hearing a rough
> > consensus.
>
> [...] And you, and another group of people, see to think that Debian
> should distribute non-software that doesn't have to modifieable.
I think nobody says (or at least means) that documentation don't need to
be modifiable at all. What is meant is that exactly what the GFDL says:
| A "Secondary Section" [...] contains nothing that could fall directly
| within that overall subject. (For example, if the Document is in part
| a textbook of mathematics, a Secondary Section may not explain any
| mathematics.) [...]
|
| The "Invariant Sections" are certain Secondary Sections [...]
Invariant sections are thought for greeting, (non-technical) forewords,
motivation chapters and the like. It seems to be consensus that
documents with too many or too large invariant sections are non-free.
(As an example see the GConf API reference at developer.gnome.org.)
- Sebastian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: