Re: Anton's amendment
Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> writes:
>> To interpret the DFSG to read into it language about functional parts
>> or to have different standards for programs and documentation, is to
>> insert something that is simply not there.
>
> I do not interpret DFSG that way. If I decide to create a package
> with some essays from www.gnu.org that package would be free acording
> to FSF and non-free acording to DFSG (because these essays are not
> modifiable). I have no problems with that.
How *do* you interpret the DFSG then?
Reply to: