[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: emacs without documentation nonsense



On 2006-11-15, Oleg Verych <olecom@flower.upol.cz> wrote:
> On 2006-11-15, hendrik wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 01:00:37AM +0000, Tyler wrote:
>>> I don't know that it's enough reason to go on living, but you will find 
>>> those docs (in)conveniently stored in the package 
>>> emacs21-common-non-dfsg, in the non-free repos.
>
> Sure i can. Anyone can. But this is not all DFSG thing about.
>
>>> At some point I wonder if the devs will realize that they undermine 
>>> their efforts to encourage users to use a dfsg-free system by all but 
>>> forcing us into the non-free repos for basic documentation?
>>
>> Which devs are the ones responsible here: the Debian devs who put it 
>> there, or the upstream ones that presumably put non-free constraints on 
>> the documentatin license?  Or is it all a big misunderstanding?
>
> DFSG is Stallman's "write down your modified version of recipe", unlike
> GFDL. I think users, like me (us?), must contact FSF and RMS there. It
> seems, we left our developers along against them.

And days after i wrote that, want to visit gnu.org to see they info and
contact to do some fsck on them and it seems to be down, very deeply down.
;-E

--
-o--=O`C  info emacs : not found  /. .\ ( is there any reason to live? )
 #oo'L O  info make  : not found      o (R.I.P. Debian Operating System)
<___=E M  man gcc    : not found    .-- (          TNX, RMS.           )



Reply to: