Re: There was never a chance of a "GFDL compromise"
Richard Stallman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> The point I am making is that Debian might indeed remove the political
> essays from our manuals if they could be removed. A few months ago,
> some people said here that if only the invariant sections could be
> removed (even though they could not be modified), nobody would ever
> remove them. Now people are saying they would indeed be removed.
NO NO NO. Nobody said that "nobody would ever remove the sections";
they said nobody would remove them IF they were free. But free
requires that they be both modifiable and removable. If they were
that, they would be there.
> The GFDL is doing its job by guarding against this. Debian may label
> our manuals as "non-free", an appelation I disagree with and will
> criticize, but at least it cannot remove them.
Yep, it can. The manuals will be removed.
> But now I see that this idea has a serious drawback: Debian would
> probably immediately remove the invariant sections and distribute the
> manual sans invariant sections under the GPL. I think that nixes it.
Why not make the sections changeable?