Re: The invariant sections are not forbidden by DFSG
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 04:59:45PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
>
> Debian consideres _everything_ to be under the same guidelines and
> there should be no difference between a program, a manual or a
> specification. FSF does not agree with us on this,
FSF never claimed that it is principly impossible to apply one and the
same guidelines to a program, a manual or a specification.
Acording to Stallman in order for some functional work to be
considered free, we must be allowed to use it, to adapt it, to
distribute it, to improve and release the improvements to the public.
Programs, manuals and specifications are examples for functional works
so it is not principly impossible to modify the definition
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html in a way that would allow
us to apply it unambiguously to manuals and specifications.
> so it is not always possible to say "FSF Free == DFSG Free".
It is possible to say FSF free functional work == DFSG free functional work.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 05:33:17PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> Sure they can. Consider that most GNU GFDL'd documentation is written
> in Texinfo format. This format is program code designed to run
> through the TeX or makeinfo interpreters. The same applies to troff
> documentation which is a program run through the groff interpreter.
>
> The line between "code" and "documentation" is not a clear one, since
> they are often one and the same thing, and this has been discussed
> quite a lot during past discussion.
I agree.
Anton Zinoviev
Reply to: