Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)

To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
From: MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 23:18:26 -0000
Message-id: <[🔎] slrnbir622.eob.markj+0111@bouncing.localnet>
References: <20030731171312.GB3205@wile.excelhustler.com> <20030731190215.GI12795@donarmstrong.com> <20030731190215.GI12795@donarmstrong.com> <[🔎] bgf77s$a39$1@main.gmane.org>

Sergey V. Spiridonov <sena@hurd.homeunix.org> wrote:
> What about

...not cutting out all the definition alternatives that don't support
your position?

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
  - From: "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <sena@hurd.homeunix.org>

References:
- Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
  - From: "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <sena@hurd.homeunix.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Next by Date: a minimal copyleft
Previous by thread: Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Next by thread: Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread