Re: GR proposal: GFDL with no Invariant Sections is free
olive <email@example.com> wrote:
> Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> > olive <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >>Let's conclude we do not agree. I respect your opinion but I invite
> >>you to respect mine.
> > Note that this is exactly the opposite of what I've taken to be your
> > central thesis: that having multiple points of view damages the free
> > software community. I've already explained why I disagree with this, so
> > I wont do so again. But you might be interested in looking back through
> > the archives for discussions with and about OSI and the OSD. I think
> > those discussions covered much of the same ground.
> When I say that I respect the opinion of someone else; it does not mean
> that I agree with it. I was just upset to read from the previous post
> (which was not yours) that "everyone with a straight face" must disagree
> with me (about the freeness of the GFDL); while the opinion I defend is
> just the opinion of the FSF, the creator of the word "free software".
You do realize that even the FSF does not think that the GFDL is a
free license? They just don't think that freedom is as important for
documentation as in software.