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

Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:57:18PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Freedoms for Documentation
> Analogous to the software program freedoms, we need to articulate the freedoms
> required for the subset of software called documentation.
>  1. The freedom to read the text, for any purpose.
>  2. The freedom to study how the text is written, and adapt it to your needs.
>     Access to the text in the preferred form for modification is a precondition
>     for this. This includes the ability to modify the work to fit in low memory
>     situations, reference cards, PDA's, embedded devices, etc.
>  3. Freedom to reformat the document into a preferred format or medium
>     (converting to braille, or speech, or hardcopy, or postscript, etc).
>  4. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
>  5. The freedom to improve the text, and release your improvements to the
>     public, so that the whole community benefits. Access to the preferred form
>     for modification is a precondition for this. For program documentation,
>     this implies being able to change the documentation to reflect the changes
>     in the program.
>  6. Freedom to translate the text into any other language.
>  7. The freedom to keep your modifications, or even your possession of a copy
>     of the text, confidential.

I believe the DFSG already articulates these freedoms very well. Most of
this seems like subsets of "must allow modifications and derived works".  I
think that if any of the above is not believed (by Debian) to be covered
by the DFSG, then the DFSG should be adjusted.  (I should be allowed to
translate a program into any other language, print a hardcopy, and so on.)

I don't think it's in our interests to begin using different lists of freedoms
for different types of software.

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: