Re: GFDL Freeness and Cover Texts
Sam Hartman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >>>>> "Henning" == Henning Makholm <email@example.com> writes:
> Henning> Scripsit "Michael D. Crawford" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >> I don't have any invariant sections in any of them, but each of
> >> them specifies a brief back cover text:
> >> Is that a problem?
> Henning> My impression of the consensus that is shaping up is that
> Henning> we're likely to consider *any* cover text as a
> Henning> problem. The one you use does not seem to be particularly
> Henning> obnoxious in itself, but it would be confusing and
> Henning> unmanageable to use that kind of judgements for including
> Henning> some docs and rejecting others.
> How is this any worse than an advertizing clause or a requirement to
> make a statement in supporting documentation? We consider both of
> those free.
It can be misleading or wrong, and you'll never be able to take it