Re: Anton's amendment

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:40:38AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Yavor Doganov <yavor@doganov.org> writes:
> 
> > This is not a proper example.  Non-modifiability of secondary.c may
> > obstruct further improvements of the program.  This is not the case
> > with the invariant sections, which do not prevent the manual to be
> > enhanced.  
> 
> Sometimes an enhancement requires removing invariant sections.  For
> example, if you want to turn the manual into a reference card.

so make your reference card and include a link to the FSF's site for the
full documentation.  one link hardly even qualifies as inconvenient.

even if you couldn't include a link and had to include the entire invariant
section, you're still only talking about a convenience issue NOT A FREEDOM
ISSUE.

> Sometimes an enhancement requires rewriting invariant sections. For
> example, to correct factual mistakes or express more correct opinions.

no, you do not put words in other people's mouths.

you add your "corrections" and make it clear that they are YOURS and not
the original author's.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>           (part time cyborg)