Re: documentation x executable code

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:56:09AM +0100, Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
> O M?rcores,  5 de Xaneiro de 2005 ?s 19:42:46 +1100, Craig Sanders escrib?a:
> 
> > because the DFSG explicitly allows a license to restrict modification so that
> > it is only permitted by patch.
> 
>  As long as we can distribute a modified binary.
> 
>  There's no way we can distribute a GFDL-licensed document with a
> patched-modified invariant section, no matter how many "compiling" or
> "processing" passes we give to it.

wrong.

i couldn't be bothered rewriting the same argument, so i'll just cut and
paste:

  i can take a GFDL document with an invariant section, add another
  section which argues against, subverts, or just supplements the
  invariant section, AND i can distribute the result as either a new
  source tarball with Makefile or build-script etc or as a complete
  formatted manual (electronic or printed or whatever). i can also
  modify & redistribute non-invariant sections in any way i please.

  i can also distribute a "patch file" which contains that additional
  section.


craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>           (part time cyborg)