Re: A possible GFDL compromise
Anthony DeRobertis <email@example.com> writes:
> On Friday, Sep 12, 2003, at 01:55 US/Eastern, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
> > I'm sorry, I was too quick. Combining the GFDL with any license
> > (whether free software or not) produces a work which, if software,
> > would not be accepted as free software at all.
> Please tell me if I'm missing something, but this sounds quite like
> begging the question. That is, of course it doesn't, because the GFDL
> is not a free software license.
It's not begging the question, because nobody claims the GFDL is a
free software license--not the FSF even.
The FSF claims that "free" means one thing when it applies to
software, and a different thing when it applies to documentation. One
consequence of this is that the FSF now touts a "free documentation
license" which cannot be combined with *any* free software license.