Re: Poll results: User views on the FDL issue
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 04:08:37 -0400
Marty <email@example.com> wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > --- Glenn Maynard <email@example.com> wrote:
> Are you arguing that the "right" to "see the
> >> author's work as the author intended it to be seen" is more important
> >> than that? (I'll pass on the question of whether such a right exists,
> >> except to note that I've never heard of such a thing.)
> > I fully agree this sounds crackbrained and radical.
> Not at all. As I read the FSF and Stallman's position on the matter,
> that's what intended. To me what seems crackbrained and radical is this
> notion that everything in Debian is "software" and must therefore be
> under a free software license. I find it a scary concept that such
> dogmatic thinking may be in control of Debian, if for no other reason
> than it guarantees endless religious flamewars, and no sarge in the
> foreseable future. :-)
It seems that freedom is a bit over rated here. To quote Janis Joplin "Freedom
is just another word for nothing left to lose ..."
Look at the US with all the pro guns people in the name of freedom (people
should have the right to be able to defend themselves and hold guns etc. etc.)
They give up so much other freedom in the name of freedom that its ridiculous.
You need to think of whats in the best interest of the user in the end.
Documentation is not software. Requiring the right to change software to make
it fit for your own use is a good thing in the name of free software. Letting
some documentation in with invariant sections is not that bad. I can see why
authors would want that (don't attribute to me things that shouldn't be, if you
do attribute it, at least do it right, and if you don't want to just throw the
whole thing out and write your own documentation, etc.).
I think that in the case of documentation (at least when dealing with sensible
things) Debian is blowing this a bit out of proportion.
> It does not have
> > precedent in the field of free software, but my thinking here is not
> > totally original either, there is some basis for it in other fields.
> Absolutely. Preserving a document as it's intended to be seen by others
> is a matter of freedom for both author *and* reader.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org
> This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System
> at the Tel-Aviv University CC.
This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System
at the Tel-Aviv University CC.