Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text

2001-12-08 Thread Branden Robinson
On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 03:43:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: Uh. I'm a little lost. Your argument seems to be: * There's 20k bytes of invariant text in the GCC manual. * There's roughly 8k bytes of invariant text in the units this proposal uses in the GCC manual.

Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text

2001-12-08 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At the time, I wanted to leave a generous margin. Over the course of discussion it has occurred to me that being charitable isn't particularly appreciated. 32,768 struck me as generous enough without giving away the farm. You want 32,000, that's

Re: LDP licences

2001-12-08 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm sorry, did I say anything to you at all? Blah blah blah. Who said you did? Were you addressed, um, *ever* on this list?

Re: LDP licences

2001-12-08 Thread John Galt
To: John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Um, yeah. On 7 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm sorry, did I say anything to you at all? Blah blah blah. Who said you did? Were you addressed, um, *ever* on this list? -- There is no problem so great that it

Re: LDP licences

2001-12-08 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
On 7 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: Were you addressed, um, *ever* on this list? John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Um, yeah. How would you know? Because they used your name? No, that's not it.

Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text

2001-12-08 Thread Branden Robinson
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 11:25:05PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At the time, I wanted to leave a generous margin. Over the course of discussion it has occurred to me that being charitable isn't particularly appreciated. 32,768 struck me

Re: LDP licences

2001-12-08 Thread John Galt
On 7 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: On 7 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: Were you addressed, um, *ever* on this list? John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Um, yeah. How would you know? Because they used your name? No, that's not it. Waah! It's all about me losing

Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text

2001-12-08 Thread Walter Landry
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 03:43:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: The above figures are the result of opening the info files in vim and using line-visual mode to extract the relevant sections. I omitted the info node material. I didn't bother to do my

Re: REVISED PROPOSAL regarding DFSG 3 and 4, licenses, and modifiable text

2001-12-08 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 02:00:24AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: With a limit of 8,000 or 10,000 bytes, the GNU Emacs Manual would easily fail. The GNU Manifesto itself easily blows past those limits. Then it would've been a better example to look at for the purposes of determining a byte