Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:55, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 01:42, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a
> > > > DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
> > > Why? What freedoms are important for software that aren't for documentation?
> > Revisionist history, for one.
> How about correcting a supposedly historical document, for example,
> taking a document that describes Windows as the progenitor of the trend
> for GUIs, and adding some explanation about Apple and Xerox and suchlike?
That would be the obvious counterexample.
Representing such changes as the opinions of the original author would
be bad, but the DFSG covers those cases already.
I mentioned Thoreau in another thread, and the Bible in another; though
they are free in every sense, perhaps that would be a place where we
would need to be careful about modifications. I'm sure John Stuart Mill
would be horrified to find his works published with "errata" edited by
J. Edgar Hoover.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org