Re: FYI: GNU Emacs Manual to be moved to non-free
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Not being able to remove the invariant sections when I am
trying to extract a subset of the document for use in other places
(like I can with subsets of the code) seems to limit my freedom;
Please look at the archives of debian-legal for the various valid
points that have been made by people in debian.
i'm sure there are valid points and whatnot, but if those points at the
end of the day mean /usr/share/emacs or /usr/info is missing stuff that
i'd like to see there, then i'm happy (in my own little world, never
mind trying to influence all these legal experts ;-) to install under
/usr/local a less-broken, not to mention more customized, emacs.
No. We have done an evaluation of the GDFL, and it was found
wanting. You are belittling the stance taken by Debian; we have a
track record of not shrinking from doing the right thing. Marking the
GDFL as non-free may well be the right thing as far as our opinion
goes, if that is road we do go down on.=20
i'm not belittling, just side-stepping a group-think exercise that has
resulted, in practice, in making and acting on policies irrelevent to my
own (wrt emacs). if you feel belittled, that is not my intent.
Funny. Seems to me that demanding libr=E9 documentation keeps to
the spirit of freedom of software; rather than insisting parts of
software be immutable and unremovable.
fine fine. let me just re-arrange your 1's and 0's and misquote you:
Funny [...] that documentation keeps [...] software
[...] immutable and unremovable.
hmmm, that's not what you Meant? but that's what you Said, all i did
was Excerpt some pieces. don't Blame me for exercising my rights!
(end parody attempt that could be interpreted as belittling by the
Please join -legal if you think you have valid arguments on this
issue; sniping at debian on unrelated mailing lists is not helpful.
nobody is sniping at debian, just ignoring some of its gyrations (and
sharing practical advice on how others may do the same).
if debian-emacsen is an unrelated mailing list to the topic of debian
recategorizing an emacs manaul, then i suppose i will just go back to
doing whatever i was before that was indeed emacs-related.