Re: [rant] Re: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:37:14 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> said:
> Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net> writes:
>> To me, the non-freeness added to developers (for a fork, for example)
>> is more important than the inconvenience (or possible extra costs) to
>> publishers.
> If it leaves you no sensible way to publish your own manuals, the word
> "freedom" seems to acquire a backward meaning.
"If it leaves you no sensible way to copy between a program and its own
documentation, the word "freedom" seems to acquire a backward meaning."
Frankly, I think that the developers' freedom is more important than a
publisher's minor inconvenience or added cost. And if that were the
only reason for different license terms, IMHO the sensible thing to do
would be either to license the documentation under a GPL + exceptions
license, or to dual license.
--
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: