Re: existing FDL documentation won't hurt
Sunnanvind Fenderson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> (Oh, and by the way, RMS kept ignoring me. That's really creepy, am I
> in his killfile or something?)
Did he get your messages? He doesn't subscribe to debian-legal, so if
you over-zealously trimmed him from your messages, of course he
wouldn't get them.
> While Branden and his posse agreed to always be watchful of
> "supposedly" FDL:ed documents that marks up things as invariant that
> can't be invariant.
As indeed we *should* do.... for *every* package. Though the
conversation *was* useful in my opinion, because it did alert us all
to the issues so that we know what to look for and how.
> So now I'm just basically sitting back to see what happens. My head
> hurts. And I think I have a rash. Maybe I should eat something now.
Let me just say that I found the conversation exceedingly useful in
clarifying what we should do--and while your initial worries weren't
necessarily so well founded, the fact that you brought it up was a