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

Re: [rant] Re: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free



On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:35:47 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> said:

> Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net> writes:
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> The Emacs documentation is far more integrated into its normal
>>> operation than with other tools.  It does not make sense to separate
>>> them.
>> 
>> Right.  One wonders why they have to be under different licenses.

> Because the manual is also distributed in printed form.

Is that the only reason?  Why not dual-license, then?

> And the GPL is not really well-suited for publications in print: the
> obligation to provide the full source code at cost means additional
> obligations for a publisher, impacting the work flow and the price of
> the end result, even though no sane person would actually have a use
> for the source of that _particular_ publication instead of the one
> accompanying his copy of Emacs.

-- 
Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: hubert@uhoreg.ca - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA   (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7  5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA



Reply to: