Re: The invariant sections are not forbidden by DFSG
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:54:40AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> wrote:
> >> Let the sheet instead be a coffee cup; in Germany Lehmann's sell
> >> cups with Emacs or vi commands on them. You can't add a second cup
> >> for the invariant sections, even if they fit on it, since people
> >> usually buy or donate (and use) only one cup at a time.
> >
> > The same trick works here - one cup and one sheet of paper. Not
> > everybody will like that solution but it works.
>
> Excuse me, you are telling me that a sheet of paper is a "front matter"
> or "appendix" of a cup? How do you ensure that the "front matter" is
> still readable after a couple of rounds of pouring coffee, spilling
> coffee, and dishwasher use?
thank you for this shining example. if anyone was wondering what i meant
by saying that the loony zealots go off on irrelevant pedantic tangents,
then here is a perfect example.
coffee cups - you people really aren't even close to sane, are you?
and yet you take yourself so seriously. how strange.
> Or are you trying to write a satire?
pot. kettle. black.
> >> Imagine that AUCTeX's manual was under GFDL, and I want to distribute
> >> only file:///usr/share/doc/auctex/HTML/auctex/auctex_11.html (which
> >> deals with language support) in a documentation bundle about "Optimizing
> >> TeX workflow for i18n and l10n".
> >
> > It is not inconvenient to distribute auctex_11.html together with the
> > invariant sections.
>
> Of course it is - imagine that my documentation contains parts from 10
> documents, all under GFDL, all using lots of invariant sections - that
> would be more than inconvenient.
the DFSG does not require convenience. it requires freedom. lack of
convenience DOES NOT equate to non-free.
case in point - it is inconvenient (for both the distributor and the
user) to distribute modified software in the form of original work +
patch file. very inconvenient. in fact, a complete PITA, especially for
the user. yet that is explicitly defined as being free in the DFSG.
feel free to ignore this fact - it's based in reality and doesn't
conform to your loony zealot prejudices.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
Reply to: