Re: documentation eq software ?
firstname.lastname@example.org (Brian T. Sniffen) a tapoté :
> > Please point out which parts of Emacs documentation are
> > invariant. If I'm not mistaking, these parts express some personal
> > feelings. Personals feelings are not something that can be enhanced by
> > someone else.
> First, in English, variant and non-invariant are not synonyms:
> There is a difference between variance and derivation. Nobody can
> change the GPL -- not even the FSF. They could publish something new
> called the GPL, which might derive from the older GPL. I might even
> publish a work called "GNU GPL", though I would violate trademark law
> to do so. Invariant sections are not merely invariant, but cannot be
> used as the foundation for derived works.
> Arguments like those you present here, which assert that I could
> somehow mystically change another's opinion by editing text he
> produced, are not useful or interesting.
If you edit the GNU Manifesto and redistribute under the same name,
without telling clearly you modified it and what you modified, you
distribute a text which may be taken as someone's opinion while it's no
longer the case.
> The right question is not "Should I be able to change this document,
> which carries an imprimatur from a trademark?" but "Should I be able
> to derive works from this work?" or "Should I be able to use this
> neat thing in making my own thing?"
I think that when you read the GNU Manifesto and follow it's spirit,
you're already "using this neat thing (an idea) making your own thing
> > If a text express a personal feelings, typo are not about to be
> > fixed to enhance the text: it would change the nature of the
> > text. Would you like to enhance Cicero, for instance?
> Certainly, I am glad Cicero's work is now Free: I've used several of
> his techniques to enhance my own writing,
I was speaking about enhancing Cicero itself.
> in some cases deriving from his text. I've also published
> translations and annotated editions of his work. I cannot do this
> with a GFDL Invariant Section.
Annotation are not modifications to the text itself. I believe you are
making a mistake:
You can annotate and translate a Cicero's text, even if the whole
original text is a GFDL Invariant Section: you just have to include
this original invariant text. The GFDL does not forbid you to add your
own annotations and your own translation along with the original
Not a native english speaker: