Re: [rant] Re: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free
Michael Olson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> I'm sorry you don't like this. I'm not really fond of it either, but
>> I have the choice of either do what the Project decided or resign
>> from the Project. I've chosen the former.
> I've chosen the latter. That is, replacing Debian on my own machine,
> and no longer advocating the installation of Debian. I'll continue to
> maintain Debian packages for my Emacs-based software for at least a
> month or two, depending on whether I choose Ubuntu, which uses Debian
I'm happy for you if you can find another distribution which cares
for freedom as much as Debian and which is technically as good.
> If an OS keeps trying its best to hinder users from accessing valid
> documentation for their software, I cannot advocate its use.
I think you will as well have to explain users why on the one hand one
must be free to modify source code and on the other hand why one
does not necessary have to be free to modify documentation.
While not satisfactory, I think the outcomes of the GR express some
kind of consistency with Debian, I think.
> I'm half-tempted to move my software to non-free and place a notice in
> README.Debian to the point that Debian prefers the "Freedom to deface
> and dilute documentation", instead of the four kinds of freedom for
> users of the software (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html).
> This probably won't happen, but it's a nice thought.
I didn't see at gnu.org any reference about why one shall not be
free to modify documentation, that is why invariant sections