Re: migrating away from the FDL
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Mathieu Roy wrote:
>> ... Based on this, I believe that RMS would say that a program with
>> an unremovable, unmodifiable, 10,000 word "Ode to my goldfish" and
>> no other restrictions would be free software, although
>> inconvenient. I haven't seen anyone from Debian defend that
>> position yet.
> If you want to know what rms consider as free software and what he do
> not consider as free software, please take a look at <http://www.gnu.org>,
> especially <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html>
> You do not have to guess, to "believe", what position he may defends
> because it's already explicitely stated.
I've read those, of course. More relevant to these hypothetical
licences is http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html , which (if
read carefully) also supports my position above. However, I am not
RMS, and I can't apply the algorithms he would use to judge freeness,
so there is a certain amount of guessing, since I know of no softwareq
distributed under this hypothetical ode-ious license.