Re: documentation eq software ?
Mathieu Roy wrote:
>Matthew Garrett <firstname.lastname@example.org> a tapoté :
>> My GPLed code can be taken by you and racist error messages inserted.
>> If you continue to print my name as author in the help text, this
>> plainly misrepresents my opinions. Do you believe that the GPL should do
>> something to protect against this?
>There is a subble difference between your software and a Manifesto: a
>Manifesto most important purpose is to represent his author
>opinions. Not a software.
Why are we more concerned about misrepresentation of opinion in one case
than the other? It's still misrepresentation of opinion. How is
modifying the GNU manifesto to misrepresent someone more personally
iff -ur coreutils-5.0.90/src/ls.c coreutils-5.0.90.new/src/ls.c
--- coreutils-5.0.90/src/ls.c 2003-07-27 07:33:36.000000000 +0100
+++ coreutils-5.0.90.new/src/ls.c 2003-08-30 13:46:52.000000000
@@ -3758,6 +3758,7 @@
Sort entries alphabetically if none of -cftuSUX nor --sort.\n\
+ fputs (_("Note: The author of this software believes that the
invasion of Iraq was an act fully justified by international law\n"),
Mandatory arguments to long options are mandatory for short options
? I've seen several pieces of software which made political statements.
The author obviously felt that doing so was important. Should the GPL
protect those opinions?
Matthew Garrett | email@example.com