[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

Mathieu Roy wrote:
Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org> a tapoté :

On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 10:15:57AM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:

That's really "end of discussion". If this clear wordings stands also
for the FSF, than there is nothing how the manuals can become free.

[become free _SOFTWARE_]

No, he didn't say that, he said "become free".  The freedoms that are
important for software are also important for documentation.  This
has been pointed out numerous times, and I've yet to see any interesting
arguments otherwise.

Debian is about Free _Software_.
It's pretty clear that GNU does not consider that
political/philosophical/historical texts, which can be part of a
documentation, should be ruled like Free _Software_.
Debian at the contrary only speaks about Free _Software_ and does not
define how should be ruled political/philosophical/historical texts.

Despite the fact that many people in Debian consider that the world
should be ruled by the Free Software definition originated from GNU,
it's not something obvious and something that Free Software
contributors needs to believe in -- because it's out of the scope of
_software_, indeed, unless you pretend that any work on earth is

Look, I think we're getting tired of this argument, that documentation distributed by Debian isn't software. Please review the mailing list archives for why documentation in Debian is software.

-- Keith, who sincerely hopes we'll stop seeing the same arguments rehashed time and time again.

Reply to: