Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
On 2003-09-09 12:26:23 +0100 Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org> wrote:
If nobody here see any distinction between the GNU Emacs manual and
Macromedia Flash, I do not think that an agreement can still be
possible.
That was not what was said. Likewise, if no-one can see the
similarities, I do not think there will be agreement.
So FSF advertises for SCO, according to your reasoning? After all,
they give an address for SCO.
Do the FSF tell "go there get the SCO brand new software"?
Do Debian say "go get this non-free software"?
I argued that links are not recommendations by countering your
apparent proposition that any link is recommendation.
I never said that, please quote me saying that or forget it.
Hence "apparent". You often omit your reasoning from your messages,
which is why I seldom answer you. If you are just asserting "black is
white," it is safe to ignore you without harm. The cynic would say
that you omit your reasoning so that you may change it when
challenged.
Is this mail a software?
Yes, this email is software. Do you think it is hardware?
Beside from that, what is your problem with GFDLed documentation
without any invariant parts?
Please see other messages, as you have been directed many times by
many people now.
Do you mean that it's not possible to just distribute a GFDLed
documentation alone?
Yes. FDL-covered documentation must be distributed as part of a work
that includes things which make the work as a whole non-free.
I do not understand what "work" refers to, what "documentation part"
refers to.
I think that, in the language of the FDL, "work" is "work" or
"Document" and "documentation part" is that part of the work which is
not a "Secondary Section".
And you noticed that the expression "free stuff" is
ambiguous but you use it. Puzzling.
As I said, it's not directly relevant. I suggest we take this part
off-list.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Reply to: