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

Re: could you safely rewrite the DFSG requirement?

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 11:23:32AM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> Does it mean that you would actually agree on removing GFDL covered manuals
> with invariant sections from Debian?

Keep in mind that even I don't advocate that if the manual has no
Invariant Sections.  The new GFDL draft is quite interesting and appears
to have motivated at least in part by the discussion thread(s) that
involved this mailing list, Thomas Bushnell, RMS, and myself.

Last I checked, however, the diff that the FSF posted was not correct;
the actual draft contained new language not mentioned in the diff.  This
was probably an oversight.

Hrm, now the diff isn't even available:


Not Found! HTTP Error 404 Your requested URL
/copyleft/fdl-1.1-to-1.2-draft.diff was not found on this webserver. 

I clicked on the link from http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html#SEC2.

RMS, can you ask someone to look into this, please?

G. Branden Robinson                |     One man's "magic" is another man's
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     engineering.  "Supernatural" is a
branden@debian.org                 |     null word.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpZ6vSeKz9ln.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: