Re: old and new GNU documentation licenses, and the some of the manuals to which they apply

[Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net>]

Claus Färber <claus@xn--frber-gra.muc.de> wrote:

> Peter S Galbraith  schrieb/wrote:
> > Claus Färber <claus@xn--frber-gra.muc.de> wrote:
> >> It can be a seperate XML (or whatever) file that's only read by the
> >> software.
> 
> > But that's not what he meant!  Please don't change what he said to fit
> > your view.
> 
> That's your interpretation of what he said. Please don't interpret what
> he said to fit your view.

Yeah, right.
 
> > That would be a major inconvenience to do in elisp instead of
> > simply insert the text in the code.
> 
> Which is a bad programming practice as it makes translations harder.

1- Bad programming practice or not, it's true.

2- Then file a huge bug with Emacs, because that's how they do it.
 
> Further, texts so smalled can hardly be based on full-text documentation  
> but have to be re-written anyway. They are probably trivial enough not  
> to be copyrightable anyway.

Not true.  I've copied hundreds of line from www.debian.org into
debian-bug.el for one.  In the MH-E project, we routinely copy doc
strings into the manual, re-work them and copy them back modified into
the code.

Peter